Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Puppeteer Debugger MCP Server

Puppeteer Debugger MCP Server

by ALIEX7664
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

get_performance

Retrieve performance timeline and page load metrics for a specified URL to analyze browser performance and diagnose loading issues.

Instructions

获取性能数据（Performance Timeline、页面加载指标）

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": "get_performance"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlNo页面 URL（可选）

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.3.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It does not disclose side effects, required permissions, or whether it is read-only. The description is minimal and does not explain what happens if url is omitted or what the return format is.

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?

Single sentence that is concise and front-loaded. The parentheses add specific types without clutter.

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?

For a simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description provides basic understanding. However, it could be more specific about the data returned or how it relates to sibling tools.

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 has 100% coverage with description for the 'url' parameter. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states it gets performance data and specifies types (Performance Timeline, page load metrics). It is specific and distinct from sibling tools like analyze_memory or get_cache_status, but does not explicitly differentiate from get_lighthouse.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_lighthouse or analyze_memory. No context about prerequisites or situations where this tool is preferred.

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