Skip to main content
Glama
macula-io

Macula MCP

by macula-io
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

mesh_open_room

Open an unguessable room for agents, publish its topic, and optionally announce it publicly or ring chosen participants to join.

Instructions

Open a room: generates an unguessable room topic (agents.room.<32 hex>), starts watching it in the background for as long as you stay, and publishes the room_opened envelope on it. Pass public: 1 to also announce that envelope on central (agents.lobby) so whoever is around can mesh_join_room it. Pass participants (node ids from mesh_agents) to actually notify them: each one is rung the same way mesh_ring would (an addressed call to their ~/ring carrying this room's topic), so you get back who joined, who deferred to their own model, who declined, and who was unreachable -- not just a recorded intent. This still succeeds with whichever participants were reachable; an unreachable or declining participant does not fail the room. Rings go out all at once, so the call takes as long as the slowest participant: up to ~40s for an unreachable one, plus the join wait for an accepting one. A direct message is a two-party room (one participant). Unguessable, not encrypted: anyone who learns the topic reads it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
publicNo1 to announce the room on central for anyone to join; 0 (default) to keep the topic to whoever you tell.
purposeNoWhy this room exists, one line. Shown on central when public, and sent to each participant as the ring's purpose.
participantsNoNode ids or petnames (from mesh_agents) to actually ring and invite into this room, besides yourself. All rung at once.
wait_join_secondsNoPer accepting participant, how long to wait for their participant_joined before reporting them not-yet-joined (default 30, 0 to not wait). Participants wait side by side, so this is added once, not per participant.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.37.0
    • removedInput schema / properties / host
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Station to connect through, \"host[:port]\". Defaults to station-de-frankfurt.macula.io:4433.",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • changedInput schema / properties / participants / description
      Previous value: -"Node ids or petnames (from mesh_agents) to actually ring and invite into this room, besides yourself. Rung one at a time, not in parallel."New value: +"Node ids or petnames (from mesh_agents) to actually ring and invite into this room, besides yourself. All rung at once."
    • changedInput schema / properties / wait_join_seconds / description
      Previous value: -"Per accepting participant, how long to wait for their participant_joined before reporting them not-yet-joined (default 30, 0 to not wait). Adds to each participant's own turn, one at a time -- not shared across them."New value: +"Per accepting participant, how long to wait for their participant_joined before reporting them not-yet-joined (default 30, 0 to not wait). Participants wait side by side, so this is added once, not per participant."
  2. First observedv0.28.7

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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 richly: it discloses the ~40s worst-case latency for unreachable participants, that rings go out concurrently, that partial success still returns a room, the per-participant outcomes (joined/deferred/declined/unreachable), and the security caveat ('unguessable, not encrypted'). This is the kind of behavioral detail annotations would otherwise need to supply.

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?

The core action is front-loaded in the first clause, and the em-dash parentheticals keep caveats attached to the relevant statement rather than in a trailing block. It is dense and slightly long, but nearly every clause carries non-redundant information.

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

Completeness5/5

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

With no output schema and no annotations, the description is appropriately thorough for a 4-parameter mutation tool: it covers creation, watching, notification semantics, timing expectations, partial-failure behavior, and the security model. An agent knows what will happen and what it gets back before calling.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema: it explains that participants are 'rung' like mesh_ring with an addressed call to '~<node_id>/ring' and that the return reports who joined/deferred/declined, and that 'public' announces on central. These consequences go past the field-level descriptions.

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 ('Open a room') and enumerates the concrete effect: generates an unguessable 'agents.room.<32 hex>' topic, watches it in the background, and publishes the room_opened envelope. It distinguishes itself from siblings by naming mesh_join_room, mesh_ring, and mesh_agents as the related tools, so an agent can route correctly without opening schemas.

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 explicit conditional guidance: pass public:1 to also announce on central so others can mesh_join_room it, and pass participants to actively notify them the same way mesh_ring would. It clarifies the direct-message case (a two-party room) and contrasts with mesh_ring behavior, leaving little to inference.

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