Skip to main content
Glama
Yan-Vi

easy-spec-mcp

by Yan-Vi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

live_status

Get real-time status of active browser automation sessions and connections.

Instructions

List which projects currently have a side panel connected to this bridge (by folder name -- call this to see what's available to target, e.g. before omitting project on another live_* tool). agentName is THIS server's own stable name (e.g. "claude-1", tied to its port slot, not random) -- shown in the side panel's pending-connection list when it asks the user to approve this agent, so telling the user this name lets them confirm which pending entry to click Approve on. sessions gives each connected panel's own OPAQUE connection id (e.g. "a1b2c3d4", assigned by this bridge, meaningless on its own, and NOT the panel's own secret session name -- that value never travels from a panel to this server in any form) -- only relevant once more than one panel is connected at once; pass one as session on another live_* tool to target it specifically instead of hitting the "more than one side panel connected" ambiguity error. This never reveals a session name you weren't already told directly by the user -- the only way one reaches you at all is the user pasting it into connect_panel themselves.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.4

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden and excels: it discloses that `agentName` is stable and tied to a port slot, `sessions` are opaque connection IDs, and explicitly states the tool never reveals session names not already given by the user. This transparency exceeds basic expectations.

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?

Though lengthy, every sentence adds necessary context: purpose, usage examples, output field semantics, and security caveat. The main purpose is front-loaded, and the structure follows a logical flow from 'what' to 'how to use' to 'what it returns'.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description fully covers the tool's behavior, output interpretation, and the security boundary. An agent has all information needed to call it correctly and understand the response, making it complete for this tool's complexity.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description doesn't need to explain parameters, and it instead explains the output fields (agentName, sessions) which is valuable context beyond the empty schema.

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?

The description explicitly states the tool lists which projects have a connected side panel, identified by folder name, and frames it as a discovery step before targeting with other live_* tools. It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings by explaining its role in the live_* workflow.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: call before omitting `project` on another live_* tool, and explains when to use the `session` parameter (when multiple panels are connected) to avoid ambiguity errors. It also explains how to use `agentName` for user approval, covering practical usage scenarios.

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