Skip to main content
Glama

termix_roles

Manage Termix roles, user memberships, and host or folder access permissions. Create roles, assign users, share hosts, and revoke access with confirmation safeguards.

Instructions

Manage Termix roles, who is in them, and which hosts they can reach.

Read actions (run right away): list all roles members users in a role (needs role_id) user_roles roles of one user (needs user_id) users all users, to find a user_id host_access who a host is shared with (needs host_id) folder_access standing share rules for a folder (needs folder) Change actions (need confirm=true, so ask the user first): create needs name (lowercase, digits, _ or -) and display_name update needs role_id, and display_name and/or description assign needs role_id and user_id share_host needs host_id, and role_ids and/or user_ids share_folder needs folder, and role_ids and/or user_ids (also covers hosts added to that folder later) update_access needs host_id, access_id, permission_level and/or duration_hours Destructive actions (need confirm=true and confirm_phrase="METHOD /path"): delete delete a role (needs role_id) unassign take a role off a user (needs role_id and user_id) revoke_access remove a host share (needs host_id and access_id) delete_folder_rule remove a folder share rule (needs access_id) Sharing uses the host's saved credential. No passwords pass through here.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo
actionNolist
folderNo
confirmNo
host_idNo
role_idNo
user_idNo
role_idsNo
user_idsNo
access_idNo
descriptionNo
display_nameNo
confirm_phraseNo
duration_hoursNo
permission_levelNoconnect

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.1.1

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses the confirmation gate, the confirm_phrase format, that sharing uses the host's saved credential, and that no passwords pass through. It stops short of saying what delete or unassign actually destroys (e.g. whether existing assignments or downstream shares are cascaded) or whether operations are reversible.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Front-loaded purpose sentence followed by risk-tiered headings and an aligned action-to-parameters list. For a 15-parameter, 14-action tool the length is justified and no line is 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the description covers action routing, safety gating, and per-action inputs. Remaining gaps are the permission_level vocabulary and the effects of destructive actions on related role/folder state.

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 coverage is 0% across 15 parameters, so the description must compensate, and it largely does by mapping required parameters to each of the 14 actions and constraining name to lowercase letters, digits, underscore or hyphen. Gaps remain: permission_level values are not enumerated despite having no schema enum, duration_hours semantics are unstated, and the exact path string expected in confirm_phrase per action is not given.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource plus its scope: managing roles, their membership, and host reachability. That scope cleanly separates it from siblings such as termix_hosts and termix_credentials, which handle hosts and secrets rather than role-based access.

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?

Explicitly partitions actions into three tiers with different invocation conditions: reads run immediately, changes require confirm=true after asking the user, destructive calls require confirm=true plus a formatted confirm_phrase. Each action also lists its prerequisite parameters, so the agent knows exactly which inputs gate which action.

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