Skip to main content
Glama

get_health

Check the operational status of the Browserless instance to verify connectivity and service availability for browser automation tasks.

Instructions

Get health status of Browserless instance

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • Main handler logic for the 'get_health' tool that invokes client.getHealth() and formats the response as MCP content.
    case 'get_health': {
      const result = await this.client!.getHealth();
      if (result.success && result.data) {
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: 'text',
              text: `Health status: ${result.data.status}`,
            },
            {
              type: 'text',
              text: JSON.stringify(result.data, null, 2),
            },
          ],
        };
      } else {
        throw new Error(result.error || 'Failed to get health status');
      }
    }
  • src/index.ts:243-250 (registration)
    Tool registration in ListToolsRequestSchema handler, defining name, description, and input schema (empty).
    {
      name: 'get_health',
      description: 'Get health status of Browserless instance',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {},
      },
    },
  • Implementation of getHealth method in BrowserlessClient that performs the actual HTTP GET request to the Browserless /health endpoint.
    async getHealth(): Promise<BrowserlessResponse<HealthResponse>> {
      try {
        const response: AxiosResponse<HealthResponse> = await this.httpClient.get('/health');
    
        return {
          success: true,
          data: response.data,
        };
      } catch (error) {
        return this.handleError(error);
      }
    }
  • TypeScript interface defining the structure of the HealthResponse returned by the /health endpoint.
    export interface HealthResponse {
      status: 'healthy' | 'unhealthy';
      uptime: number;
      memory: {
        used: number;
        total: number;
        percentage: number;
      };
      cpu: {
        usage: number;
        percentage: number;
      };
      sessions: {
        active: number;
        total: number;
      };
    } 
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states it 'gets' health status, implying a read operation, but doesn't specify what 'health status' includes (e.g., uptime, errors, metrics), whether it requires authentication, or any rate limits. This leaves significant gaps for agent understanding.

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 directly states the tool's purpose without any fluff or unnecessary elaboration. It's perfectly front-loaded and wastes no words.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple health-check tool with 0 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, without annotations or output schema, it lacks details on what 'health status' returns (e.g., JSON structure, key indicators), which could hinder agent usage in complex scenarios.

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 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%, so there's no need for parameter explanation in the description. The baseline for this scenario is 4, as the description appropriately avoids redundant parameter details.

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 clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('health status of Browserless instance'), making the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_config' or 'get_metrics' that also retrieve status information, preventing a perfect score.

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 like 'get_config' or 'get_metrics', nor does it mention any prerequisites or context for usage. It's a basic statement of function without operational guidance.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

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/Lizzard-Solutions/browserless-mcp'

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