Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Blujay MCP Server

Blujay MCP Server

Official
by blujayhq
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Typing indicator

set_typing
Idempotent

Show or hide the typing bubble in an iMessage conversation, letting users indicate they are drafting a reply or stop the indicator.

Instructions

Show or hide the typing bubble in an iMessage conversation, for example while drafting a reply.

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": {
      "chat_id": "<chat_id>",
      "typing": "<typing>"
    },
    "name": "set_typing"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typingYes
chat_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.2

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, idempotent, open-world operation, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that this is an ephemeral UI signal tied to drafting, but it does not say whether the indicator auto-expires, how long it persists, or what permissions the account needs.

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?

A single sentence with the action front-loaded and a concrete use case appended; nothing is wasted and nothing is buried.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema and complete annotation coverage, the description is nearly sufficient. The main omission is the lifetime semantics of the typing indicator, which an agent would reasonably want to know.

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%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. 'Show or hide' effectively explains the boolean 'typing' flag, and 'in an iMessage conversation' implies chat_id, but neither parameter is named or its format specified, leaving a modest gap.

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 names a specific verb pair (show/hide), a specific resource (the typing bubble), and scopes it to an iMessage conversation, which separates it cleanly from send_message or edit_message. It stops short of naming a sibling for contrast, so it lands at 4 rather than 5.

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?

'For example while drafting a reply' implies the when-to-use context, but there is no explicit guidance about when not to call it and no alternative named. The usage signal is present but inferred rather than stated.

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