Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
grandma2-mcp

grandma2-mcp

by RaSteaks
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

ma2_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Inspect a verified grandMA2 runtime for onPC or MA3D without changing the show, helping confirm the active target before sending commands.

Instructions

Inspect one verified runtime: target is onpc or ma3d. Does not change the Show.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "ma2_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
targetNoonpc

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The sentence "Does not change the Show" largely restates that, though it adds the domain term "Show". Nothing about what the inspection returns or how a runtime is verified.

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?

Two short sentences with the resource and the valid target values front-loaded, and the non-mutating caveat last. No filler, though "verified" is an unexplained qualifier.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be described. But with zero schema description coverage, the definition should clarify what distinguishes the onpc vs ma3d runtimes and what "verified" means for a single-parameter inspection tool.

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?

Schema coverage is 0% and the single target parameter has no description or enum, so the description carries the burden — and it does by enumerating the valid values onpc or ma3d. It omits what each target actually points at and that the parameter defaults to onpc.

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?

"Inspect one verified runtime" names a specific verb (inspect) and resource (runtime), and the target values onpc/ma3d scope it to a single host. It is distinguishable from siblings like ma2_execute and ma2_list, though "verified runtime" is jargon that isn't defined.

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?

"Does not change the Show" implies this is the safe read-only path, but the description never says when to pick it over ma2_list or ma2_connections. Usage is only inferable from the read-only phrasing, not stated explicitly.

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