Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
norns-mcp

norns-mcp

by AdairBear
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

norns_current_script

Retrieve the currently running script's name, path, engine, and parameter count from matron; returns 'none' when no script is loaded.

Instructions

The running script (name, path, engine, param count) from matron. name 'none' means nothing is loaded.

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": "norns_current_script"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the load. It does valuable work by disclosing the data source (matron) and the 'none' sentinel for the empty state, but it does not state that the call is non-mutating, whether it can fail, or how fresh the data 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?

Two short sentences with no filler, and the field enumeration is front-loaded. The first sentence is a verbless fragment, which is terse but still readable.

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?

For a zero-argument read of a single resource with an output schema present, the description covers what is returned and the empty-state case. Return-value structure is correctly left to the output schema.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate beyond the schema; baseline applies and the field list is a useful but supplementary addition.

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?

Names the specific resource (the currently running script) and enumerates the returned fields (name, path, engine, param count), which lets an agent separate it from norns_list_scripts or norns_read_script. It stops short of explicitly naming those siblings, so differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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: the 'name none means nothing is loaded' note signals this is a status check, but the description never says when to prefer it over norns_list_scripts or norns_status, nor any precondition.

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