Picodev Lab

Session status

session_status

Read-only

The session's state without its events, cheap enough to poll: browser connected (owner), visibility, current viewer link (not renewed), viewers, created_at and expires_at (Unix seconds), run (compilations so far: event times restart at each), level and levels (null in free mode), capture ({id, kind, state} of the session's capture, logic or analog, or null). Not reported to the human's journal.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "session_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`session`	No
`agent_token`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed7 schema fields changedOct 23, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / agent_token / anyOf
```
Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / agent_token / default
```
Added value: +null
```
- removedInput schema / properties / agent_token / type
```
Removed value: -"string"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / session / anyOf
```
Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / session / default
```
Added value: +null
```
- removedInput schema / properties / session / type
```
Removed value: -"string"
```
- removedInput schema / required
```
Removed value: -[
-  "session",
-  "agent_token"
-]
```
First observedOct 21, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/non-destructive annotations, the description discloses genuinely useful traits: it is cheap to poll, it does NOT write to the human's journal, and fetching the viewer link does not renew it. The 'event times restart at each run' note clarifies counter semantics. What's missing is any note on error behavior for an invalid/expired session.

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?

The key distinctions ('without its events', 'cheap enough to poll') are front-loaded in the first clause. The long parenthetical field enumeration is dense but earns its place because there is no output schema, though scannability suffers in a single run-on sentence.

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?

Return fields are covered thoroughly, which is necessary given no output schema. However, with 0% parameter coverage the definition omits how to target a session at all, which is a meaningful gap for a two-parameter tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% and both parameters (session, agent_token) are completely undocumented in the schema. The description never explains what 'session' defaults to or what agent_token is for, so an agent has no guidance on whether it must supply them.

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 clearly identifies the resource (the session's state) and its defining characteristic: it returns state 'without its events', separating it from event-reading siblings. It never names an alternative tool, so the agent must infer the boundary from sibling names alone.

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?

'Cheap enough to poll' is the only usage cue and it does imply a polling/monitoring role. There is no explicit when-not guidance and no sibling (e.g. queue_status, bench_snapshot, read_simulation) is named as an alternative, leaving selection to inference.

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

All Picodev Lab tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.