Skip to main content
Glama
Harusame64

desktop-touch-mcp

by Harusame64
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

server_status

Check MCP server health, engine availability, and diagnostic snapshot to confirm native UIA and image-diff engines are running.

Instructions

Return MCP server status. engine: native engine availability — uia: 'native' = Rust UIA addon (~2 ms focus / ~100 ms tree); 'powershell' = PS fallback (~366 ms focus). nativeUia says why: 'native', 'disabled' (DESKTOP_TOUCH_DISABLE_NATIVE_UIA=1 takes the native UIA engine out and keeps the rest of the addon: UIA calls with a PowerShell version use it, the rest are skipped), or 'unavailable' (the addon has no UIA engine). nativeUiaEvidence says whether the native UIA engine actually ran in this process, as the engine and the OS answer rather than the switch: comThreadStarts and tasksSent (the engine's own counts of attempts), tasksDone (tasks the engine finished; far below tasksSent means native UIA is stuck and every UIA call is waiting out its timeout), focusRegistration ('pending' for long means focus events are off because a desktop-wide registration is not returning), uiaCoreLoaded (whether UIAutomationCore.dll is loaded, supporting evidence only); null = the addon cannot say. It changes per call, so read it after the act it should cover. imageDiff: 'native' = Rust SSE2 SIMD (0.26 ms @ 1080p); 'typescript' = TS fallback (~3.8 ms). health: process diagnostic snapshot (issue #365) — pid (which process these numbers are from; the evidence counts restart from zero in a new one), uptimeSec, memory.{rssBytes,heapUsedBytes,heapTotalBytes}, cpu.{userUs,systemUs} (cumulative since startup), shutdown.{pending,graceMs,inflightCount} (pending=true means stdin EOF received and grace timer is running), lastRpc.{receivedAt(ISO),method} (last JSON-RPC request observed on stdio transport; HTTP transport is not tracked). Diagnostic metadata — do not surface unless the user asks about performance/troubleshooting. engine values other than nativeUiaEvidence are stable for the process lifetime; nativeUiaEvidence and health change per call.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
includeNoOptional response-shape opt-in. `['envelope']` returns the self-documenting envelope (`_version` / `data` / `as_of` / `confidence`). `['raw']` forces raw shape (overrides DESKTOP_TOUCH_ENVELOPE=1 server default). Default behaviour is raw shape (compat with existing clients).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.9.2
  2. Removedv1.8.0
  3. Addedv1.6.0
  4. Removedv1.5.1
  5. Addedv1.5.0
  6. Removedv1.4.3
  7. Addedv1.4.2
  8. Removedv1.4.0
  9. Changed1 schema field changedv1.2.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / include
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional response-shape opt-in. `['envelope']` returns the self-documenting envelope (`_version` / `data` / `as_of` / `confidence`). `['raw']` forces raw shape (overrides DESKTOP_TOUCH_ENVELOPE=1 server default). Default behaviour is raw shape (compat with existing clients).",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
  10. Addedv1.1.1
  11. Removedv1.1.0
  12. Addedv1.0.3

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that results change per call, that health is a process diagnostic snapshot, that nativeUiaEvidence reflects actual engine runs rather than the switch, that shutdown.pending indicates stdin EOF, and that lastRpc only tracks stdio transport. These are exactly the kind of behavioral caveats an agent needs, and they are clearly stated.

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?

The description is long but deliberately structured into field groups (engine, nativeUia, imageDiff, health) with terse explanations. The opening sentence states the core purpose, and each section earns its place by defining non-obvious semantics and failure modes. It could be trimmed slightly, but the density is justified by the tool's diagnostic complexity.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Despite having no output schema, the description thoroughly documents every return value, sub-field, and their dynamic behavior. It explains limitations (HTTP transport not tracked), how to interpret counts (tasksDone vs tasksSent), and why a value might be null. An agent can call this tool and correctly interpret the response with no further information.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the include parameter is fully documented in the input schema. The description adds nothing about the include parameter beyond what the schema says (envelope/raw), so the baseline of 3 applies. It does not worsen or improve the semantic gap.

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 opens with 'Return MCP server status', a specific verb+resource pair. It then enumerates the distinct field groups (engine, nativeUia, imageDiff, health, lastRpc) with precise meanings, making it unmistakably different from sibling tools like desktop_state or workspace_snapshot. The resource and scope are fully stated.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives clear usage context: 'Diagnostic metadata — do not surface unless the user asks about performance/troubleshooting' signals when the tool is appropriate. It also advises 'read it after the act it should cover' because values change per call. It does not name explicit alternatives or exclude any sibling, but it orients the agent well.

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