Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
codex-mcp-bridge

codex-mcp-bridge

by buidangminh23
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Open a Codex thread in the desktop app

open_codex_thread
Idempotent

Brings a Codex thread to the front on Windows or macOS via codex://threads/ so a human can watch the work live instead of reading the transcript afterwards.

Instructions

Bring a Codex thread to the front on Windows or macOS using (codex://threads/) so a human can watch the work live instead of reading the transcript afterwards.

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": {
      "threadId": "<threadId>"
    },
    "name": "open_codex_thread"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
threadIdYesCodex thread id
backgroundNoOpen without stealing focus from the current app (default false)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.23.0
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. First observedv1.11.2

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare idempotent=true and destructive=false; the description adds genuinely new context by disclosing the mechanism (a codex://threads/<id> deep link) and the OS-level side effect of foregrounding a desktop app on Windows/macOS. It stops short of the operationally useful failure modes — behavior when the app is not installed, the OS is unsupported, or the thread id is unknown — so a 4 rather than a 5.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the action and platform support, with the rationale appended. Nothing is padded or repeated from the schema.

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 simple two-parameter launch tool with no output schema, the description covers mechanism, platforms, and intent. The remaining gap is outcome disclosure — whether anything is returned or how failure surfaces when the app cannot be opened — which an agent would want in order to handle errors.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both threadId and background are already documented in the schema; the description only echoes the thread id inside the URL template. It adds no meaning about the 'background' flag or about acceptable threadId formats, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Bring a Codex thread to the front') plus the platform scope (Windows or macOS), which an agent cannot infer from the name alone. It implicitly contrasts with transcript-reading tools via 'instead of reading the transcript afterwards', but never names a sibling such as read_codex_thread, so differentiation is suggestive rather than explicit.

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?

Gives a clear usage condition: use this when a human should watch the work live rather than read the transcript afterwards. It does not state exclusions or failure conditions (e.g., what to do on Linux, or if the desktop app is not installed), nor does it name the alternative tool to call instead.

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