Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
express-reader-mcp

express-reader-mcp

by Eflarus
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

express_status

Check the running eXpress app to view the signed-in user, chat and unread counts, and open chat without triggering read receipts.

Instructions

Check the running eXpress app: signed-in user, chat count, unread count, which chat is open. Side-effect-free (no read receipts).

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": "express_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the operation is side-effect-free and specifically avoids read receipts, which matters for unread counts, but it omits error conditions such as what happens if the app is not running and does not describe auth or rate-limit behavior.

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 two compact sentences with zero wasted words. The core purpose is front-loaded, followed by the returned fields and the important side-effect note.

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?

Because there is no output schema, the description does well to list the returned status fields: signed-in user, chat count, unread count, and open chat. It is nearly complete for a zero-parameter status tool, missing only edge-case behavior such as what happens when the app is not running.

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 takes zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to document. The baseline for a parameterless tool is 4, and the description appropriately adds no misleading parameter information.

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?

The description states a specific verb ('Check') and resource ('the running eXpress app'), then enumerates exactly what status fields are returned. It clearly separates this aggregate status check from sibling tools like express_list_chats or express_read_chat, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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 the usage context: call this to inspect the current app state. However, the description gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no routing to sibling tools for deeper information such as listing chats or reading messages.

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