Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Screen Browser

by com.screenbrowser
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get credits

get_credits
Read-onlyIdempotent

The organisation's credit balance, credits reserved by runs in progress, what is available, the rate (credits per minute of video), and top-up links to hand to the user when the balance is short.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
top_upYes
balanceYesCredits on the account.
availableYesbalance minus in_flight, never below 0.
in_flightYesCredits reserved by runs in progress.
credits_per_video_minuteYesRate with a Standard voice.
default_voice_credits_per_video_minuteYesRate with the Studio voice projects use unless another is chosen; use this for estimates.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedOutput schema / properties / credits_per_video_minute / description
      Previous value: -"Base rate for a standard voice."New value: +"Rate with a Standard voice."
    • addedOutput schema / properties / default_voice_credits_per_video_minute
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Rate with the Studio voice projects use unless another is chosen; use this for estimates.",
+  "type": "number"
+}
    • changedOutput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "balance",
-  "in_flight",
-  "available",
-  "credits_per_video_minute",
-  "top_up"
-]New value: +[
+  "balance",
+  "in_flight",
+  "available",
+  "credits_per_video_minute",
+  "default_voice_credits_per_video_minute",
+  "top_up"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond them: it returns a derived rate (credits per minute of video) and top-up links intended to be surfaced to the user, which shapes how the agent should present results. It does not mention freshness/staleness of the balance, which would be the last useful detail.

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?

A single sentence with no filler, front-loading the balance and reserved credits before the actionable top-up links. Every clause earns its place by naming a distinct returned quantity.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description need not define return types, and it wisely focuses on the agent-facing workflow (surface links when short). Combined with annotations, an agent has enough to call it correctly and act on the result. The only gap is not explicitly stating the relationship to top_up.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to clarify; baseline is 4. The description correctly spends its words on output semantics instead of inventing parameter guidance.

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 precisely enumerates what this tool returns (balance, reserved credits, available, rate, top-up links), which is a specific resource even without an explicit verb. It is distinguishable from siblings like top_up because it frames links as something to hand to the user rather than an action performed. It stops short of naming top_up as the alternative action, so differentiation is implied rather than stated.

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?

Usage context is implied by 'to hand to the user when the balance is short', which tells the agent what to do with the links but not explicitly when to call this tool versus top_up. There is no exclusion or prerequisite statement. An agent can infer the read-only check-then-top-up flow, but must do so itself.

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

All Screen Browser toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources