Retrieve the value of a specified discovered UI control using a targeted path, so you can inspect only the intended element and avoid unrelated chat or private fields.
Read the value of a specific discovered UI control. Use targeted paths to avoid unrelated chat or private fields.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint true, openWorldHint true, and destructiveHint false, covering the safety profile. The description adds a privacy-focused targeting caution that is not in annotations, but omits prerequisites, error behavior, and return format.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two short sentences with no filler: purpose first, then a targeted-usage rule. Every sentence contributes to selection or safe invocation.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a single-parameter read tool with annotations covering safety, the description is largely complete: it says what is read and how to scope the path. It could still note that the path comes from ui_find or describe the returned value type, but the core is covered.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It clarifies that 'path' identifies a specific discovered UI control and should be targeted, adding useful semantic context beyond a bare string, though it does not specify path syntax or source.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb, 'Read,' and resource, 'value of a specific discovered UI control,' so the core action is clear. However, it does not name or distinguish itself from siblings such as ui_inspect or ui_find, leaving sibling differentiation implicit.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Offers a practical targeting rule, 'Use targeted paths to avoid unrelated chat or private fields,' which implies safe usage. But it never states when to choose ui_get_value over alternatives like ui_inspect or ui_set_text, and there are no explicit when-not conditions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.