Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

pageaudit

by online.pageaudit
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Tab history

tab_history
Read-onlyIdempotent

The tab's previous runs and what changed between each one and the one before it (score delta, findings that appeared and that disappeared). Every run has always been kept; this is where you read the series. Each entry carries the score, the counts and a change with the point delta and the findings that appeared (broke) or disappeared (fixed) since the previous run — compared by finding code, never by message. Runs older than the watch feature are matched by URL.

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": {
      "guest_token": "<guest_token>",
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "tab_history"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesID of the tab whose runs you want.
limitNohow many runs, newest first (default 20, max 100)
guest_tokenYesPrivate owner token returned by guest creation. Sent in X-Guest-Token; reuse it for this owner's resources.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / guest_token / description
      Added value: +"Private owner token returned by guest creation. Sent in X-Guest-Token; reuse it for this owner's resources."
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations it adds real behavior: full retention history, comparison by finding code rather than message, and URL-based matching for runs predating the watch feature. These are non-obvious traits an agent could not infer from the annotations or schema.

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 core purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, with supporting detail following. It is slightly dense with em-dash asides and quoted terms, but each sentence contributes information rather than padding.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the burden of describing returns — and it does, explaining each entry's score, counts, and a `change` object with point delta and `broke`/`fixed` findings. Nothing essential for correct invocation or interpretation is missing.

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 coverage is 100% and each parameter is already documented, so the description needn't restate them. It adds semantic context about comparison/matching but says nothing extra about `id`, `limit`, or `guest_token` beyond the schema. Baseline 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 names a specific resource and scope: 'The tab's previous runs and what changed between each one and the one before it'. It clearly separates this read-the-series tool from siblings like run_tab and watch_tab without needing their schemas.

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?

It gives clear context for when to reach for it — 'Every run has always been kept; this is where you read the series' — implying you use this rather than re-running. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state exclusions (e.g. use watch_tab to start a series), so it stops short of a 5.

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

All pageaudit 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