Kilotest

listViolators

Read-onlyIdempotent

Provide details about one issue in one report, including basics about the elements of the tested page that were reported as exhibiting the issue. Kilotest tests web pages for front-end quality (accessibility, usability, and standards conformity); results are organized as report, then issue, then violator element, then diagnosis.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`jobID`	Yes	Job identifier of the report (example: x9z)
`issueID`	Yes	Issue identifier (example: contrastPoor)
`timeStamp`	Yes	Timestamp of the report in YYMMDDTHHmm format (example: 260503T0432)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`tool name`	Yes
`this request`	Yes
`tool collection`	Yes
`response content`	Yes
`response metadata`	Yes
`URLs of similar requests for web users`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 2, 2026
- removedOutput schema / definitions / RequestReference / properties / method / const
```
Removed value: -"GET"
```
- addedOutput schema / definitions / RequestReference / properties / method / enum
```
Added value: +[
+  "GET",
+  "POST"
+]
```

Changed4 schema fields changedSep 15, 2026

changedOutput schema / definitions / ReportBasics / properties / days since the report was completed / type
```
Previous value: -"number"New value: +[
+  "number",
+  "null"
+]
```

addedOutput schema / properties / response content / properties / basics about all elements exhibiting the issue

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": false,
+        "properties": {
+          "count of rule engines reporting that the element exhibited the issue": {
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "how to get details about the element": {
+            "additionalProperties": false,
+            "properties": {
+              "URL": {
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "request method": {
+                "const": "GET",
+                "type": "string"
+              }
+            },
+            "required": [
+              "URL",
+              "request method"
+            ],
+            "type": "object"
+          },
+          "identifier": {
+            "description": "Catalog index of the element in the report; a string or number, copied verbatim.",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "number"
+            ]
+          },
+          "inner text": {
+            "description": "Copied from the report catalog entry; type not guaranteed."
+          },
+          "tag name": {
+            "description": "Copied from the report catalog entry; type not guaranteed."
+          },
+          "web users can get details about the element at": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "identifier",
+          "tag name",
+          "inner text",
+          "count of rule engines reporting that the element exhibited the issue",
+          "how to get details about the element",
+          "web users can get details about the element at"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ]
+}

removedOutput schema / properties / response content / properties / basics about all elements reported as exhibiting the issue

Removed value: -{
-  "anyOf": [
-    {
-      "items": {
-        "additionalProperties": false,
-        "properties": {
-          "count of rule engines reporting that the element exhibited the issue": {
-            "type": "number"
-          },
-          "how to get details about the element": {
-            "additionalProperties": false,
-            "properties": {
-              "URL": {
-                "type": "string"
-              },
-              "request method": {
-                "const": "GET",
-                "type": "string"
-              }
-            },
-            "required": [
-              "URL",
-              "request method"
-            ],
-            "type": "object"
-          },
-          "identifier": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "inner text": {
-            "description": "Copied from the report catalog entry; type not guaranteed."
-          },
-          "tag name": {
-            "description": "Copied from the report catalog entry; type not guaranteed."
-          },
-          "web users can get details about the element at": {
-            "type": "string"
-          }
-        },
-        "required": [
-          "identifier",
-          "tag name",
-          "inner text",
-          "count of rule engines reporting that the element exhibited the issue",
-          "how to get details about the element",
-          "web users can get details about the element at"
-        ],
-        "type": "object"
-      },
-      "type": "array"
-    },
-    {
-      "type": "null"
-    }
-  ]
-}

changedOutput schema / properties / response content / required

Previous value: -[
-  "basics about the report",
-  "basics about the issue",
-  "details about the issue",
-  "basics about all elements reported as exhibiting the issue"
-]New value: +[
+  "basics about the report",
+  "basics about the issue",
+  "details about the issue",
+  "basics about all elements exhibiting the issue"
+]

First observedSep 1, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds domain context (what Kilotest is and how results are organized) but nothing about result shape, pagination, or the relationship to the diagnosis level beyond the hierarchy list.

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?

Two sentences, no filler, with the output scope stated first and the domain model second. It is appropriately short for a read-only lookup, though the opening sentence could have named the tool's actual resource (violator elements) more directly.

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?

An output schema exists so return values needn't be explained, and annotations cover safety, leaving little for the description to carry. Still, it fails to position this tool against listIssues/listDiagnoses, which is the main gap for a crowded sibling set of eleven tools.

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 100%, with each of jobID, issueID and timeStamp documented including formats and examples, so the schema carries the parameter burden. The description contributes no additional meaning about how these three identifiers combine to scope the query, so baseline 3 applies.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description says it provides details about one issue in one report including the elements exhibiting that issue, and it lays out the report→issue→violator→diagnosis hierarchy. However, it never uses the word 'violator' and reads more like a single-issue lookup than a listing tool, so the verb+resource is muddled and it does not distinguish itself from siblings listIssues or listDiagnoses.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance and no alternatives named, even though listIssues and listDiagnoses are obvious candidates for confusion. The hierarchy sentence only implicitly hints at when this tool fits (after you have a jobID/issueID/timeStamp).

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

All Kilotest tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Give agents eyes on the webHosted screenshot MCP. Send a URL, get a pixel-perfect image. $0.002 per grab. Works with Claude, Cursor, and Codex.grabbit.liveAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?