Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Traceo

by io.github.muhamad-0
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get network requests

get_network_requests
Read-onlyIdempotent

HTTP requests captured during the recording, one line each: time, method, status, URL (query strings stripped), duration, type, size. No request/response bodies are captured. Sensitive headers are redacted.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "recording": "<recording>"
    },
    "name": "get_network_requests"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeNoResource type, e.g. xhr, fetch, script.
limitNoMax lines to return.
cursorNoPagination cursor from a previous call.
domainNoSubstring match on the request host.
methodNoHTTP method, e.g. POST.
statusNo"failed" (network error or >=400), "2xx", "3xx", "4xx", "5xx", or an exact code like "404".
recordingYesTraceo share link (e.g. https://www.traceo.dev/abc123...) or recording id.
include_headersNoInclude request (>) and response (<) headers. Default false.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral facts that annotations cannot convey: response/request bodies are not captured at all, query strings are stripped from URLs, and sensitive headers are redacted. It still says nothing about how large recordings are handled or what an empty result means.

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?

Three short sentences with zero filler. The output shape is front-loaded first, followed by the two constraints an agent most needs to know before calling (no bodies, redacted headers). Nothing repeats the schema or the annotations.

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?

With eight parameters, full schema coverage, and no output schema, the description does the important extra work of describing the returned line format and the redaction/omission rules, which the schema cannot express. Pagination via cursor and the 200-line cap are left entirely to the schema, but that is acceptable given the coverage. An agent has enough to call this 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 every one of the eight parameters (type, status, domain, method, limit, cursor, recording, include_headers) is already documented in the schema, including the unusual status vocabulary. The description adds only the note that query strings are stripped from returned URLs, which is a return-value detail rather than parameter guidance, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource: HTTP requests captured during a recording, returned one line each. It also enumerates the returned fields (time, method, status, URL, duration, type, size), so an agent knows exactly what it gets. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like get_console_logs, though the resource distinction is fairly self-evident.

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 is only implied: an agent infers this is the tool for inspecting network traffic while diagnosing a page load or failed request. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no pointer to sibling tools for console logs or user actions, and no stated prerequisites for a valid recording identifier. The explicit 'no bodies captured' limitation is the closest thing to a selection constraint.

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

All Traceo toolsInspect
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.

Resources