Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
gdbstub-mcp

gdbstub-mcp

by 0xmortuex
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

debug_sessions

List active GDB stub connections to track connected QEMU targets and manage ongoing bare-metal debugging sessions.

Instructions

List active debug sessions.

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": "debug_sessions"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing. The word "active" hints at a filter excluding terminated sessions, but there is no statement about whether this is read-only, whether it requires an existing connection or authentication, or how many sessions are returned.

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?

A single short sentence with zero wasted words, and the key qualifier ("active") is front-loaded. It is efficient, though its brevity borders on under-specification rather than tight writing.

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?

The tool is simple: no parameters and an output schema that already documents the return shape, so the description needn't explain results. However, with no annotations at all, the absence of any safety, prerequisite or connection-state context leaves a real gap for an agent deciding whether it can call this yet.

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 the baseline of 4 applies; there is no parameter meaning for the description to add. Nothing in the schema needed compensating for.

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?

"List active debug sessions" gives a specific verb (List) and a specific resource (active debug sessions), which separates it from action siblings like debug_connect, debug_break or debug_step. It stops short of naming any sibling or stating scope relative to them, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative named. An agent can infer that this is a discovery call before debug_connect or debug_breakpoints, but that inference comes entirely from the sibling list, not from the definition.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools