Skip to main content
Glama
CollabVMgamez

Peggle AI MCP Server

by CollabVMgamez
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript
Local

Server Quality Checklist

58%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.

  • Latest release: v1.0.0

  • Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools have completely distinct purposes: one captures visual data from the screen, while the other performs a mouse interaction at specific coordinates. There is no overlap in functionality, making it impossible to confuse them.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with snake_case naming: capture_screen and click_at. The naming is clear, predictable, and adheres to the same convention throughout.

    Tool Count2/5

    With only two tools, the server feels thin for a general-purpose automation or interaction domain like screen capture and mouse control. Key operations such as keyboard input, drag-and-drop, or region-specific screenshots are missing, limiting the scope significantly.

    Completeness2/5

    For a server implied to handle desktop automation or interaction (based on screen capture and mouse click), there are significant gaps. Missing tools include keyboard input, mouse movement without clicking, drag operations, and more advanced screen interactions, which will likely cause agent failures in broader automation tasks.

  • Average 3.3/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.

    See the Tool Scores section below for per-tool breakdowns.

    • No community issues in the last 6 months
    • 0 commits in the last 12 weeks
    • No stable releases found
    • No critical vulnerability alerts
    • No high-severity vulnerability alerts
    • No code scanning findings
    • CI status not available

  • Add a LICENSE file by following GitHub's guide. Once GitHub recognizes the license, the system will automatically detect it within a few hours.

    If the license does not appear after some time, you can manually trigger a new scan using the MCP server admin interface.

    MCP servers without a LICENSE cannot be installed.

  • This repository includes a README.md file.

  • No tool usage detected in the last 30 days. Usage tracking helps demonstrate server value.

    Tip: use the "Try in Browser" feature on the server page to seed initial usage.

  • Add a glama.json file to provide metadata about your server.

  • If you are the author, simply .

    If the server belongs to an organization, first add glama.json to the root of your repository:

    {
  "$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/server.json",
  "maintainers": [
    "your-github-username"
  ]
}

    Then . Browse examples.

  • Add related servers to improve discoverability.

How to sync the server with GitHub?

Servers are automatically synced at least once per day, but you can also sync manually at any time to instantly update the server profile.

To manually sync the server, click the "Sync Server" button in the MCP server admin interface.

How is the quality score calculated?

The overall quality score combines two components: Tool Definition Quality (70%) and Server Coherence (30%).

Tool Definition Quality measures how well each tool describes itself to AI agents. Every tool is scored 1–5 across six dimensions: Purpose Clarity (25%), Usage Guidelines (20%), Behavioral Transparency (20%), Parameter Semantics (15%), Conciseness & Structure (10%), and Contextual Completeness (10%). The server-level definition quality score is calculated as 60% mean TDQS + 40% minimum TDQS, so a single poorly described tool pulls the score down.

Server Coherence evaluates how well the tools work together as a set, scoring four dimensions equally: Disambiguation (can agents tell tools apart?), Naming Consistency, Tool Count Appropriateness, and Completeness (are there gaps in the tool surface?).

Tiers are derived from the overall score: A (≥3.5), B (≥3.0), C (≥2.0), D (≥1.0), F (<1.0). B and above is considered passing.

Tool Scores

  • Behavior2/5

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

    No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action but does not disclose critical traits like whether this requires specific permissions (e.g., system access), potential side effects (e.g., unintended UI changes), or error handling (e.g., invalid coordinates). This leaves significant gaps for a mutation tool.

    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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action without unnecessary words. It directly communicates the tool's function, making it easy to understand at a glance, with zero wasted content.

    Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

    Completeness2/5

    Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

    Given the complexity of a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral traits, error conditions, or return values, which are essential for safe and effective use. The description does not compensate for the absence of structured data.

    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 schema description coverage is 100%, with clear descriptions for 'x' and 'y' as coordinates. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as coordinate system details (e.g., screen pixels, relative positioning) or usage examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

    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 specific action ('Moves the mouse to the specified coordinates and performs a left click'), which includes both the verb ('moves', 'performs') and the resource ('mouse', 'left click'). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'capture_screen' by focusing on interaction rather than observation.

    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?

    The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as the sibling 'capture_screen' or other potential interaction tools. It lacks context about scenarios where clicking at coordinates is appropriate, such as in automation or UI testing, and offers no exclusions or prerequisites.

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

  • Behavior2/5

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

    With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action and output but lacks details on permissions needed, whether it requires user interaction, potential side effects (e.g., privacy implications), or error conditions. This is a significant gap for a tool that interacts with system resources.

    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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action and output without any wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool with no parameters.

    Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

    Completeness2/5

    Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

    Given the complexity of capturing system screenshots (which may involve permissions, user prompts, or platform-specific behavior), the description is incomplete. With no annotations and no output schema, it fails to address behavioral aspects like error handling or return format details beyond encoding, leaving gaps for the agent.

    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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so the schema fully documents the absence of parameters. The description does not add parameter information, which is appropriate here. Baseline is 4 for 0 parameters, as the description does not need to compensate for any schema gaps.

    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 specific action ('captures a screenshot') and target resource ('primary monitor'), with a precise output specification ('base64 encoded string'). It uses distinct verbs and resources that differentiate it from the sibling tool 'click_at', which appears to perform a different interaction action.

    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?

    The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any prerequisites, context for use, or exclusions, leaving the agent with no usage instructions beyond the basic purpose.

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

GitHub Badge

Glama performs regular codebase and documentation scans to:

  • Confirm that the MCP server is working as expected.
  • Confirm that there are no obvious security issues.
  • Evaluate tool definition quality.

Our badge communicates server capabilities, safety, and installation instructions.

Card Badge

peggle-ai-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

peggle-ai-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/CollabVMgamez/peggle-ai-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server