Skip to main content
Glama

local-mcp

by com.local-mcp

Web Screenshot

web_screenshot
Read-only

Captures a PNG screenshot of the current page of a web session (returned inline so web AIs can see it). Useful to ground what the page looks like before acting.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sessionNoSession name (a named login profile, e.g. 'linkedin'). Defaults to 'default'.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlNoURL of the page that was captured.
bytesNoPNG size in bytes (the image itself is an inline content block).

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description adds the detail that the screenshot is 'returned inline so web AIs can see it,' which is useful but limited. It does not mention potential delays due to page load or that it captures only the visible viewport, missing some behavioral depth.

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 consists of two succinct sentences. The first states the core function and output format, and the second provides usage guidance. Every word is necessary and front-loaded, with no redundancy.

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 the tool's simplicity (1 optional parameter, read-only, output schema present), the description is almost complete. It mentions inline return and usage context. The only slight gap is not clarifying the exact output format (e.g., base64 URL), but the output schema likely covers that.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage and only one optional parameter ('session'), the schema already explains the parameter fully. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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?

The description clearly states the action ('captures a PNG screenshot of the current page') and the resource ('web session'), with added context that it's returned inline for AI visibility. It distinguishes from sibling tools like chrome_read_tab or screenshot_capture by specifying the scope and usage.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The tool explicitly mentions it's useful to 'ground what the page looks like before acting,' providing clear context for when to use it. While it doesn't list when not to use it or name alternatives, the phrasing implies a preparatory role before interactive actions (e.g., clicking), which is sufficient given sibling tools.

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

All local-mcp toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Many tools are clearly distinct per app (e.g., chrome_*, safari_*, m365_*), but there is notable overlap between generic file tools like `file_list` and `finder_list`, both listing files; `search_contacts` and `list_contacts` serve similar purposes; `report_friction` and `report_problem` both send feedback to the team. The large number of tools with similar purposes in different domains creates moderate ambiguity for an agent.

Naming Consistency4/5

The naming convention is very consistent overall: most tools follow a `{app}_action` or `verb_noun` pattern (e.g., `chrome_click`, `create_calendar_event`, `list_reminders`). There are minor deviations like `lmcp_install_upgrade` (two verbs) and `complete_omnifocus_task` vs. `complete_reminder` (inconsistent verb placement). Still, the pattern is predictable and readable across the full set.

Tool Count2/5

With 225 tools, the surface is extremely large and heavy. While it covers many distinct domains (browsers, mail, calendar, files, notes, reminders, video editing, web automation, etc.), the sheer number makes it hard to navigate and likely includes many rarely-used tools. This is far beyond the well-scoped range of 3-15 tools and feels excessive even for a 'local everything' MCP server.

Completeness3/5

For many app integrations, the tool set provides solid CRUD coverage (e.g., Calendar has create, read, update, delete; Apple Notes has create, read, update, list, search; OmniFocus has create, list, search, complete). However, some areas are incomplete: for example, there is no tool to create a new Mail folder or delete notes. The 'web' tools lack a clear update/delete for saved sessions. The suite is broad but has notable gaps within individual domains.

Resources