Skip to main content
Glama

scout_journey

Measure how easy a real user goal is: wrap it from start to end, click through the UI as a first-time user, then report interaction cost, path, and backtracking friction.

Instructions

Measure how EASY a real task is, not just whether it works — the question pass/fail e2e suites never answer. Wrap one user goal: scout_journey {action:'start', goal:'Create an order'}, perform it the way a first-time user would (navigate by CLICKING through the UI, not by jumping to a known deep URL — a shortcut invalidates the measurement), then scout_journey {action:'end', completed:true|false}. Returns interaction cost (clicks, navigations, distinct screens, elapsed), the actual path taken, and friction signals: BACKTRACKS (returning to a screen already left — the clearest sign the next step wasn't discoverable), screen count, and over-interaction. Run it on each module's primary journey; an abandoned journey is a high-severity finding.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
goalNoFor start: the user-facing task, e.g. 'Create an order and assign it'
noteNoFor end: what made it hard or easy, in one line
actionYes'start' before attempting the task, 'end' when done or blocked
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.
completedNoFor end: did the user actually achieve the goal? false is a strong finding.

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

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It transparently lists what is returned (interaction cost, path, friction signals like BACKTRACKS, screen count, over-interaction) and warns that shortcuts invalidate the measurement. It does not explicitly state whether the tool modifies the application or requires specific permissions, but its description as a measurement wrapper implies read-only behavior.

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?

The description is a single, well-structured paragraph that front-loads the core purpose and then provides necessary operational details. Every sentence contributes useful information, though it could benefit from minor formatting (e.g., bullets) for readability.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (a measurement wrapper with start/end lifecycle), the description covers the essential workflow, return values, and usage frequency. It omits details about the session parameter's concurrency behavior, but the schema compensates. No output schema exists, yet the description adequately explains the return format.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all five parameters. The description restates the start/end usage pattern with goal and completed, but adds no new meaning beyond what the schema provides for parameters like session or note. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Measure how EASY a real task is' and explicitly contrasts this with pass/fail e2e suites. It then details the start/end wrapper pattern with concrete examples, making it unambiguous what the tool does and how it differs from simple pass/fail testing.

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 states when to use the tool ('Run it on each module's primary journey') and gives a crucial usage constraint ('navigate by CLICKING through the UI, not by jumping to a known deep URL — a shortcut invalidates the measurement'). However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or when not to use it, leaving some inference to the agent.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.