Skip to main content
Glama
brunoboto96

SceneScout

by brunoboto96
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

scout_design_audit

Audit a live page's computed styles for measurable design defects like WCAG contrast, clipped text, and overflow, plus craft issues and a design-system coherence score.

Instructions

Computed-style design audit of the current page — a design connoisseur's read WITHOUT screenshots. Measurable defects (⚠): WCAG contrast, tiny targets, clipped text, aspect-distorted images, horizontal overflow, sibling cards touching with no gap (naming their parent), missing keyboard-focus indicators (sampled with real Tab presses). Craft suggestions (→): line measure and line-height rhythm, spacing-scale adherence, typography entropy, palette discipline (gray census, accent hue families, pure-#000 body text), elevation/control consistency, heading structure, indistinguishable links, and AI-slop tells (gradient text, glassmorphism, side-stripe borders, neon glows, violet gradients, identical card grids). Ends with a SYSTEM SUMMARY of design-system coherence and a PAGE SCORE whose why: line lists the largest deductions behind it; once four pages are audited, a SITE CONSISTENCY block sets this page's button heights, radii, headers, tabs and grays beside the other pages' and names the values only one page uses. Run once per representative page; the → tier is improvement feedback — file genuine opportunities as ux-polish findings with the concrete numbers, not just defects.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sessionNoTarget this session directly instead of the active one — pass it explicitly when dispatching to MULTIPLE sessions in one turn (e.g. two scout_click calls with different `session`), which then run CONCURRENTLY rather than queueing. Omit for single-session sequential use.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv3.31.0
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. Addedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations, so the description carries the full burden, and it does substantial work: it enumerates what is measured, discloses that keyboard-focus sampling uses 'real Tab presses' (an actual page interaction, not a passive read), and explains the four-page threshold before the SITE CONSISTENCY block appears. It does not state runtime cost, whether the page must be loaded/authenticated first, or that the audit is read-only with respect to the page.

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?

Front-loaded with the one-line purpose before the catalogue of checks. The middle run of check names is long but each item defines an output category the agent will receive, so it earns its space; the tail about four-page site consistency is more than a caller needs up front.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description must convey the return shape — and it does: ⚠ measurable defects, → craft suggestions, SYSTEM SUMMARY, PAGE SCORE with a why: line, and the conditional SITE CONSISTENCY block. An agent knows what it will get back and how to use it.

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?

One optional parameter with 100% schema coverage, and the schema already explains the concurrency-vs-sequential semantics of `session` in detail. The description adds nothing about the parameter, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: a computed-style design audit of the current page. Explicitly distinguishes itself from the screenshot-based siblings (scout_screenshot, scout_capture) with 'WITHOUT screenshots', so an agent can route between them without opening a schema.

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?

'Run once per representative page' gives clear execution context, and the closing sentence tells the agent what to do with the results (file → items as ux-polish findings with concrete numbers). It stops short of naming a specific alternative tool to use when the agent wants visual rather than computed-style evidence.

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