Skip to main content
Glama
brunoboto96

SceneScout

by brunoboto96
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

scout_lane_brief

Split your app's routes across parallel audit lanes, returning each lane's session, objective, and owned routes to prevent overlapping or unopened areas.

Instructions

For a run split across parallel agents (lanes). Divides the app's known routes between N lanes and returns each lane's session name, the objective to attach it with, and the routes it owns — whole modules per lane, balanced by route count, so no two lanes audit the same area and none is left unopened. Call it after the first crawl, when route knowledge is complete. Touches no browser; pass the briefs to your lane agents, then use scout_lane_report for what they hand back.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
goalNoWhat the whole run is for; each lane's objective is written against it
lanesYesHow many lanes to split across (1–8)
routesNoRoutes to split. Omit to split every route this project knows about.
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.
runMinutesNoHow long the lanes will run, in minutes (default 60). When they attach by a saved role, the brief is refused if that login will not last this long plus the margin.
expiryMarginMinutesNoHow long past the run a saved role's login must still last, in minutes (default 10).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv3.14.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / expiryMarginMinutes
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "How long past the run a saved role's login must still last, in minutes (default 10).",
+  "maximum": 240,
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / runMinutes
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "How long the lanes will run, in minutes (default 60). When they attach by a saved role, the brief is refused if that login will not last this long plus the margin.",
+  "maximum": 1440,
+  "minimum": 1,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  2. Addedv3.4.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that the tool 'touches no browser' and that the caller must pass the briefs to lane agents itself. It also explains the balancing guarantee (no overlap, none left unopened) and the return shape, which is needed since there is no output schema. It doesn't cover failure modes or what happens if lanes exceed available routes.

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?

Four sentences, purpose front-loaded, zero filler. It is dense but every clause adds routing or behavioral information. Slightly long, and the return-value clause could be trimmed, but nothing is wasted.

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 6-param tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description supplies the missing pieces: what it returns, that it has no browser side effects, and the ordering constraint relative to the crawl. Remaining gaps are minor — no explicit mention of what a refused brief looks like or how to handle lane counts exceeding route counts.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds genuine meaning beyond the schema by explaining the splitting algorithm ('whole modules per lane, balanced by route count'), which tells the agent how the `lanes` and `routes` inputs actually partition work rather than merely restating their types.

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 — it divides an app's known routes across N parallel lanes and returns each lane's session name, objective, and owned routes. The scope ('whole modules per lane, balanced by route count, no two lanes audit the same area') is precise enough to separate it from scout_crawl or scout_lane_report without opening any 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?

Explicit timing: 'Call it after the first crawl, when route knowledge is complete.' It also routes the agent forward, naming scout_lane_report as the counterpart for what lanes hand back. It stops short of stating when not to use it (e.g. a single-agent run with no parallel split).

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