Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
forge

forge

by SoulNassim
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

open_glob

Launch the asset studio for a project to inspect all prompts, images, and models; starts locally if not running and returns its URL.

Instructions

Open Glob, the asset studio, on this project so the user sees every prompt, image and model. Starts it on this computer first if it isn't running. Call it when the user says 'open Glob' or 'show me the assets'. Returns the URL.

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": "open_glob"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv3.3.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does real work: it discloses a side effect ('starts it on this computer first if it isn't running') and the return value ('returns the URL'). It leaves out failure modes (what happens if the app can't start) and whether repeated calls are idempotent.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action, followed by the side effect and the trigger phrasing. Nothing is padding; every clause conveys something the caller needs.

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 one-optional-parameter launcher with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers action, side effect, trigger, and return value. The only real gap is the unspecified format of the 'project' argument.

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 coverage is 0% for the single optional 'project' parameter, and the description only implies its meaning by saying the studio opens 'on this project'. It never indicates whether the value is a name, path, ID, or what happens when it's omitted.

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 and resource ('Open Glob, the asset studio, on this project') and names the observable outcome ('the user sees every prompt, image and model'). It doesn't need explicit sibling differentiation because no other tool in the list opens a UI, but it also never states that contrast.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It supplies concrete invocation triggers ('when the user says "open Glob" or "show me the assets"'), which is unusually actionable guidance. It stops short of stating when NOT to call it or what to do if the caller expects a silent background operation rather than a visible UI launch.

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