Skip to main content
Glama
hofill
by hofill

share_request

Generate share tokens for HTTP requests to enable secure access and collaboration on captured web traffic within RequestRepo MCP.

Instructions

Create a share token for a request.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
request_idYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The actual business logic implementation of share_request in RequestrepoMCPService class. It calls the requestrepo client's share_request method and returns a dict containing request_id, share_token, and share_url.
    def share_request(self, *, request_id: str) -> dict[str, Any]:
        share_token = self._client().share_request(request_id)
        return {
            "request_id": request_id,
            "share_token": share_token,
            "share_url": f"{self.config.protocol}://{self.config.host}/r/{share_token}",
        }
  • MCP tool registration using the @mcp.tool() decorator in the create_mcp_server function. This exposes the share_request functionality to MCP clients.
    @mcp.tool()
    def share_request(request_id: str) -> dict[str, Any]:
        """Create a share token for a request."""
        return resolved_service.share_request(request_id=request_id)
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool creates something, implying a mutation, but does not clarify permissions needed, whether the share token is permanent or temporary, rate limits, or what the output contains. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and wastes no space, making it easy to parse quickly.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool has an output schema (which should cover return values) and no annotations, the description is minimally viable but incomplete. It lacks details on parameter semantics, usage context, and behavioral traits, which are needed for a mutation tool. The presence of an output schema prevents a lower score, but gaps remain.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The input schema has 0% description coverage, with only a parameter named 'request_id' documented. The description does not add any meaning beyond the schema—it does not explain what a 'request_id' is, its format, or where to obtain it. For a single parameter with no schema details, this is inadequate.

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?

The description clearly states the action ('Create a share token') and the target resource ('for a request'), which is specific and unambiguous. However, it does not differentiate this tool from its sibling 'get_shared_request', which appears to retrieve shared requests rather than create them.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_shared_request' or other request-related tools (e.g., 'delete_request', 'list_requests'). It lacks context about prerequisites, such as needing an existing request to share, or exclusions.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/hofill/RequestRepo-MCP'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server