Skip to main content
Glama
Local AI Relay
by zxc972

chat_create

Create a shared AI chat room for up to 8 members—local by default or remote with a host-configured admin token—so multiple agents can exchange messages in one room.

Instructions

创建最多 8 个成员的 AI 聊天室。本机直接创建;远程创建需宿主配置 AIRELAY_ADMIN_TOKEN。

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": {
      "room": "<room>"
    },
    "name": "chat_create"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
roomYes
serverNo网络房间的 http(s) 服务地址;省略为本机房间
session_idNo当前独立会话的固定 ID;新接入必填并在所有调用中沿用。有原生 thread_id 时须相同,否则本会话生成一次 UUID。省略仅兼容旧接入。

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already indicate this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and open-world (openWorldHint=true). The description adds meaningful context beyond that: the 8-member capacity limit and the host-side admin token requirement for remote creation. It still omits error behavior on duplicate rooms or response details, but the added constraints are valuable.

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 two short clauses with the primary action front-loaded and the local/remote distinction immediately following. There is no filler or redundant restatement.

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?

With no output schema and only sparse annotations, the description should ideally explain what a successful creation returns or how errors are surfaced. It covers capacity and remote authentication but leaves the agent without confirmation of the result shape.

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 description coverage is 67%, which is moderate. The description only indirectly relates to the 'server' parameter by distinguishing local from remote creation, and says nothing about the 'room' naming pattern or the 'session_id' reuse semantics, both of which remain documented only in the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: create an AI chatroom with a maximum of 8 members. It does not explicitly differentiate this tool from siblings like chat_join or chat_status, but the core action is unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It gives a useful condition: local creation is direct, while remote creation requires AIRELAY_ADMIN_TOKEN. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use chat_create versus chat_join, nor any exclusions or prerequisites beyond the token.

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