Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AgentRPA

AgentRPA

by c8xm
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

rpa_clients

Lists schedulable RPA robots and shows whether each client is online, so you can choose available agents for browser, desktop, or Office automation tasks.

Instructions

列出可调度的机器人（客户端）及其在线状态。

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "rpa_clients"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.7.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. '列出' (list) implies a read-only operation, and the online-status detail signals what state data is included, but there is no mention of whether this requires auth, whether the list is paginated or filtered, or what the return shape looks like. Adequate but thin for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 that front-loads the resource and adds the useful qualifier plus returned field. Nothing is wasted and there is no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-parameter read tool this covers the essentials: what is listed and that online status is included. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it could say more about scope, whether offline clients are included, or how a client identifier maps to what rpa_start_job expects.

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?

The tool takes no parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies the call is unfiltered, returning whatever set of schedulable clients exists, which is consistent with the empty schema.

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+resource: list schedulable robots (clients) along with their online status. That is clearer than a bare name restatement, and the 'schedulable' qualifier hints at the target subset. It does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings such as rpa_list_apps, so it stays 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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the discovery step for picking a client before calling rpa_start_job, and 'schedulable' narrows the scope. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use language, and no sibling is named as an alternative.

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