Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
brs-mcp

brs-mcp

by bblietz
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

sideload_app

Install a zipped Roku channel directly to a developer-mode device using HTTP Digest-authenticated multipart upload.

Instructions

Install a zip on a Roku device in developer mode via HTTP Digest-authenticated multipart POST to /plugin_install. Returns the parsed device response. dev_password is never logged or echoed.

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": {
      "zip_path": "<zip_path>",
      "device_ip": "<device_ip>",
      "dev_password": "<dev_password>"
    },
    "name": "sideload_app"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
zip_pathYes
device_ipYes
dev_passwordYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYes
statusYes
messageYes
raw_htmlNo
duration_msYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.1

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Discloses important behaviors: HTTP Digest authentication, multipart POST to specific endpoint, parsed response, and that dev_password is never logged. No annotations provided, so description carries the full burden and does well.

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?

Two dense sentences: first covers the core operation, second adds return value and security note. No wasted words, front-loaded with key information.

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?

Covers the main action and output, but lacks prerequisites (device must be in developer mode, network reachable) and error behavior. Output schema exists but description doesn't reference it.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema descriptions are 0% covered, and the description provides minimal parameter-specific details. Only dev_password's non-logging is mentioned; zip_path and device_ip are not explained beyond their names.

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 clearly states the action: 'Install a zip on a Roku device in developer mode.' It distinguishes from sibling tools (generate_app, package_app, etc.) which focus on app creation and packaging, not installation.

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?

Usage is implied but not explicit. No guidance on when to use this over alternatives or prerequisites like device must be in developer mode and network accessible.

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