Skip to main content
Glama

Proving Lab

by dev.provinglab

install_extension

Install or uninstall the capture extension in Firefox or Chrome without a window, without a click and without administrator rights. Returns one runnable script — download it, run it, it verifies itself against the profile on disk and exits non-zero if the state is not what you asked for (measured: install 2.9 s, uninstall 2.1 s). Call this when a capture route needs the extension present, when a run is finished and it should be gone again, or when asked whether an agent can set up a browser extension by itself. Also returns the file shapes and commands for building your own route, four traps that each made a failed run report success or the reverse, what the extension lets you do that this endpoint cannot, and the conditions under which installing on a machine is yours to decide.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionNoWhat you need. 'both' is the default and returns each direction — an install without its matching removal leaves a machine changed.
browserNoTarget browser. Omit for both.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden, and it delivers: it reveals that the tool returns a self-verifying script, explains non-zero exit behavior, gives measured runtimes, and even discloses failure traps and limitations. This goes far beyond a generic 'install extension' statement.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The opening sentence is strong and front-loaded, but the rest is a dense run-on that packs many distinct ideas into one long paragraph. The content is valuable, yet it could be restructured into clearer separate points without losing meaning.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description is remarkably complete: it covers the return artifact, verification behavior, failure semantics, timing, usage triggers, limitations, and even decision authority around installation. An agent has enough context to invoke the tool correctly.

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%, so the input schema already documents both parameters thoroughly, including the default behavior of 'both.' The description reinforces install/uninstall and browser names but does not need to add parameter-level detail because the schema already handles it.

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 names a specific verb and resource: install or uninstall the capture extension in Firefox or Chrome. It also clearly scopes the behavior (no window, no click, no admin rights), which sets it apart from any capture-route tooling among the siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It explicitly states when to call the tool: when a capture route needs the extension present, when a run is finished and it should be gone, or when asked whether an agent can set up a browser extension by itself. This gives concrete decision criteria rather than leaving usage to inference.

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

All Proving Lab 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

A4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, such as single vs batch citation extraction. The only potential confusion is between list_measurements and get_measurement_data, both of which return measurement data; however, their descriptions indicate one lists available data and the other retrieves a specific figure's backing data.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names predominantly follow a verb_noun pattern (extract_citation, install_extension, list_measurements). Two exceptions—adoption_stats and how_to_capture—deviate from this pattern, but they are still readable and not chaotic.

Tool Count5/5

Ten tools is a reasonable scope for a specialized server covering citation extraction, measurements, capture guidance, and project status. No tool is redundant, and the count is neither too sparse nor overwhelming.

Completeness4/5

The server covers the main workflows: single/batch citation extraction, retrieving and listing measurement data, fetching reproducible methods, and obtaining capture setup instructions. Minor gaps exist, such as no tool for creating new measurements, but the domain is primarily read-only and contribution is handled through open_work.

Resources