shared-memory

msg_board

Browse every message in a shared-memory category regardless of recipient or read state without marking them read. Use topic "list" for categories and counts.

Instructions

Browse every message of a category regardless of recipient or read state (does not mark anything read). Use topic "list" to see categories and counts.

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": {
      "topic": "<topic>"
    },
    "name": "msg_board"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No	Max messages (default 30, newest kept)
`topic`	Yes	Category name, or "list"

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Oct 21, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that nothing gets marked read and that filtering ignores recipient/read state, but says nothing about ordering, pagination, or output shape beyond the schema's 'newest kept' note.

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?

Two tight sentences with the scope constraint front-loaded and the discovery hint second. No filler or redundancy.

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 two-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers scope, side effects, and the discovery path. Only return ordering and pagination behavior are left unspecified, a minor gap.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented, including the limit default of 30 with newest kept. The description adds only the meaning of the 'list' topic (returns categories and counts), which the schema mentions tersely, so this is baseline-level added value rather than substantive elaboration.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb (browse) and resource (messages of a category) plus the scope qualifier 'regardless of recipient or read state'. The parenthetical '(does not mark anything read)' implicitly distinguishes it from the sibling msg_read, though no sibling is named outright.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

'Use topic "list" to see categories and counts' gives a concrete entry-point instruction an agent needs before it can call this tool meaningfully. It stops short of explicitly contrasting with msg_read or msg_search-type siblings, but the read-state note covers the main selection concern.

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

Deploy Server