spectra-mcp

by LowOrbitLab

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

browser_find_text

Locate text in the active browser page and return short surrounding snippets for context.

Instructions

Find text in the active page and return short surrounding snippets.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "browser_find_text"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	Yes
`session_id`	No
`max_results`	No
`context_chars`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 13, 2026

TDQS

B3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that the search is scoped to the active page and that results come back as short snippets rather than full matches, which adds real behavioral context beyond the schema. It omits case sensitivity, whether the page is scrolled or modified, and session/auth requirements.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the action and the resource, with no filler. Everything present earns its place.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, but the tool has four undocumented parameters, no annotations, and no usage context, which leaves an agent guessing about session handling, result limits, and when this tool is preferred over its many siblings.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% across 4 parameters, so the description must compensate and does not: 'query', 'max_results', 'context_chars' and 'session_id' are never explained, nor is the relationship between 'context_chars' and the 'short ... snippets' it returns. Only a loose implied link between 'query' and 'Find text' exists.

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 gives a specific verb ('Find text') and an explicit scope ('in the active page') plus the return shape ('short surrounding snippets'), which is enough to separate it from browser_get_text and browser_snapshot in intent. It stops short of naming any sibling directly.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus browser_get_text, browser_snapshot, or browser_wait_for, and no stated prerequisites (e.g., whether a session must be active or a navigation must have occurred). The only implied context is 'active page'.

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