Skip to main content
Glama
macula-io

Macula MCP

by macula-io
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

mesh_publish

Publish an integration fact to a mesh topic, letting other agents react. Signed with your agent's identity and returns the topic plus duration_ms.

Instructions

Publish an integration fact to a mesh topic so other parties' agents can react. Use a business verb for the fact type (e.g. 'module_generated', 'capability_announced'), never CRUD. Signed with this agent's identity; there is no delivery ack. Returns the topic and duration_ms. Realm defaults to io.macula. Bytes in the fact: {"$bytes": ""}, e.g. {"id": {"$bytes": "AQID"}}; a plain string is always text.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
factYesThe integration fact payload (plain JSON; this server encodes the wire). Bytes as {"$bytes": "<base64>"}.
realmNo32-byte realm id as hex (64 chars) the topic is scoped to. Omit for io.macula.
topicYesTopic name (e.g. 'agents.module_generated').

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.37.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / fact / description
      Previous value: -"The integration fact payload (plain JSON; this server encodes the wire)."New value: +"The integration fact payload (plain JSON; this server encodes the wire). Bytes as {\"$bytes\": \"<base64>\"}."
    • 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 / realm / description
      Previous value: -"32-byte realm as hex (64 chars) the topic is scoped to. Omit for the default all-zero realm. See mesh_call's realm description for the full rationale."New value: +"32-byte realm id as hex (64 chars) the topic is scoped to. Omit for io.macula."
  2. First observedv0.28.7

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
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 well: it discloses that facts are signed with the agent's identity, that there is no delivery ack (fire-and-forget), and what is returned (topic and duration_ms). It omits failure behavior, permissions, and any rate/throughput constraints.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then behavior, then return value, then parameter/naming rules. Dense but every sentence carries information; no wasted filler, though the trailing bytes example is packed tightly.

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?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essentials an agent needs: signing, no-ack semantics, return fields, realm default, and byte encoding. It could go further on error behavior, but is largely complete for a 3-param tool with nested objects.

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 already 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning beyond the schema: the business-verb naming convention for the topic and the {'$bytes': '<base64>'} encoding rule with a concrete example. It clarifies semantics the schema only gestures at.

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 (Publish) and resource (integration fact to a mesh topic) plus the goal ('so other parties' agents can react'). Highly specific, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like mesh_say or mesh_put.

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 only guidance is about fact-type naming conventions ('use a business verb... never CRUD'), not about when to choose this tool over mesh_say, mesh_put, or the other mesh_* siblings. No when/when-not or alternative selection criteria are given.

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