Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-stealth-browser

mcp-stealth-browser

by AntonLi-PM
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

proxy_status

Check residential proxy pool health, active sticky sessions, and provider status to ensure stealth browsing reliability.

Instructions

Inspect current residential proxy pool health, active sticky sessions, and provider status.

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": "proxy_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The word 'Inspect' suggests a read-only operation with no side effects, and no annotations are present to clarify behavior. The description does not explicitly state whether the tool returns data, mutates state, or has any side effects.

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?

The description is concise, direct, and free of unnecessary detail. It lists exactly what is inspected in a compact sentence.

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 parameterless status-check tool, the description adequately conveys the core purpose and scope. It does not describe the output format, but the presence of an output schema and the simple inspection nature make the description reasonably complete.

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 has no parameters, so the baseline score applies. The description is consistent with a parameterless status inspection tool and requires no additional parameter explanation.

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 clearly states the tool inspects current residential proxy pool health, active sticky sessions, and provider status. It uses a specific verb and resource scope, and is easily distinguishable from the sibling tools fetch, search, and rotate proxy.

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?

The purpose implies this is for status inspection rather than fetching, searching, or rotating proxies, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives. No direct usage conditions or exclusions are provided.

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