Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
gpu-mcp

gpu-mcp

by MYaelMendez
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

rust_run_wasm

Runs WebAssembly binaries (.wasm) using Wasmtime; if Wasmtime is unavailable, indicates the capability.

Instructions

Run a .wasm via wasmtime if present; else report capability.

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": {
      "wasm_path": "<wasm_path>"
    },
    "name": "rust_run_wasm"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
wasm_pathYespath to .wasm

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description discloses a key behavioral trait: runs only if wasmtime is present, otherwise reports capability. However, no details on permissions, side effects, or what 'report capability' entails, and there are no annotations to supplement.

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?

Single sentence, no redundancy, essential information front-loaded. Every word earns its place.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose and a key behavioral nuance. Could mention requirement for wasmtime, but overall adequate.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's 'path to .wasm'. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Run' and resource '.wasm via wasmtime', and distinguishes from sibling tools that compile or build. The conditional 'if present; else report capability' adds specificity.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool over siblings like compile_kernel or run_kernel. The name implies it's for running WASM, but no alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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