Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
SapperMCP

SapperMCP

by MasterX1582
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Dconf Read

dconf_read

Read a specific dconf key by path to check GNOME desktop configuration values during debugging and security hardening.

Instructions

Read a dconf key, e.g. /org/gnome/desktop/interface/gtk-theme.

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": {
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "dconf_read"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It implies a read-only operation, but says nothing about behavior for missing keys, whether defaults or unset values are returned, or any permission requirements. The output schema covers return shape, but error/edge-case behavior is left entirely undocumented.

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?

A single short sentence with the core action front-loaded and an illustrative example appended. It is efficient, though very lean for a tool with no annotations.

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?

The tool is simple (one required string parameter) and has an output schema, so the description needn't explain return values. However, with zero annotations and zero schema descriptions, an agent gets no guidance on key-not-found behavior or path syntax rules, leaving a modest gap.

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 0% for the single required "path" parameter, so the description must compensate. The example "/org/gnome/desktop/interface/gtk-theme" usefully demonstrates the dconf key path format, but it does not state constraints such as absolute-path requirement, trailing slashes, or schema/dir vs key distinctions.

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 ("Read") and resource ("a dconf key") and gives a concrete example path, so the operation is unambiguous. It does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like dconf_list or dconf_write, but the verb-resource pairing alone makes the intent clear.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no mention of dconf_list (for enumerating keys) or dconf_write as alternatives. Usage is only implied by the word "Read".

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