Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
vm-relay

vm-relay

by WeZZard
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Open console viewing

relay_console_open

Open console viewing for a guest lease only after a user explicitly requests to watch, using console_id and attempt_id from relay_console_resolve.

Instructions

Open console viewing for the lease of the guest that guest names, only following an explicit user request to watch. Requires console_id and attempt_id from relay_console_resolve, userRequested: true, reason (intent) and expected (what the human should expect to see); it opens on the declared service host, never a remote client, and is never triggered automatically by relay_acquire's vnc option. See relay_console_resolve for what a ready status does and does not prove. A failed or uncertain open keeps the attempt: resolve or cancel it rather than opening again with a new attempt.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "guest": "<guest>",
      "console_id": "<console_id>",
      "attempt_id": "<attempt_id>",
      "userRequested": "<userRequested>",
      "reason": "<reason>",
      "expected": "<expected>"
    },
    "name": "relay_console_open"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
guestYesThe guest this call acts on: the name relay_acquire answered.
reasonYesIntent of this execution. Retained as evidence, never identity, authorization or a retry key.
expectedYes
attempt_idYes
console_idYes
userRequestedYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.15.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / guest
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The guest this call acts on: the name relay_acquire answered.",
+  "pattern": "^[a-z0-9][a-z0-9-]{0,47}$",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "console_id",
-  "attempt_id",
-  "userRequested",
-  "reason",
-  "expected"
-]New value: +[
+  "guest",
+  "console_id",
+  "attempt_id",
+  "userRequested",
+  "reason",
+  "expected"
+]
  2. Addedv0.5.1

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations declare a non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive operation, and the description adds real context beyond them: the console opens on the declared service host and never a remote client, `reason` is retained as evidence and is never an authorization or retry key, and a failed/uncertain open must not be retried with a new attempt. It stops short of describing permissions or the return payload, so 4 rather than 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Purpose and precondition are front-loaded, and each clause carries new information (host placement, no auto-trigger, retry semantics). The middle sentence is semicolon-heavy and slightly run-on, which costs a point, but there is no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 6-parameter, all-required mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers invocation conditions, parameter provenance and failure recovery, and it delegates the meaning of a `ready` status to relay_console_resolve. What the call itself returns is unaddressed, which is the remaining gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is only 33%, so the description must compensate and largely does: it explains the provenance of `console_id` and `attempt_id`, that `userRequested` must be true, that `reason` is intent evidence, and defines `expected` as what the human should anticipate seeing. Only `guest` is left lightly covered.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Names a specific verb and resource ('Open console viewing'), constrains it to the lease of the named guest, and distinguishes itself from siblings by naming relay_console_resolve, relay_console_cancel and relay_acquire explicitly. An agent can tell this apart from the other relay_* tools without opening any schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives an explicit precondition ('only following an explicit user request to watch'), an explicit exclusion ('never triggered automatically by relay_acquire's `vnc` option'), and required upstream inputs ('Requires `console_id` and `attempt_id` from relay_console_resolve'). It even states what to do after failure, routing the agent to resolve or cancel instead of reopening.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools