Skip to main content
Glama
cexll
by cexll

ping

Test connectivity and verify the Codex MCP Server is operational by sending a message and receiving an echo response.

Instructions

Echo

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
promptNoMessage to echo

Implementation Reference

  • The execute function for the ping tool, which returns the input prompt or defaults to 'Pong!'.
    execute: async (args, onProgress) => {
      const message = args.prompt || args.message || 'Pong!';
      // Return message directly to avoid cross-platform issues with echo command
      return message as string;
    },
  • Zod schema defining the input arguments for the ping tool: an optional prompt string.
    const pingArgsSchema = z.object({
      prompt: z.string().default('').describe('Message to echo '),
    });
  • Registration of the pingTool by adding it to the toolRegistry array.
    toolRegistry.push(
      askCodexTool,
      batchCodexTool,
      // reviewCodexTool,
      pingTool,
      helpTool,
      versionTool,
      brainstormTool,
      fetchChunkTool,
      timeoutTestTool
    );
Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Echo' implies a simple read-only operation that returns input unchanged, but it does not specify whether this involves network latency, error handling, or any side effects. The description fails to add context beyond the basic implication, leaving behavioral traits like performance or limitations undocumented.

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?

The description is a single word, 'Echo', which is extremely concise and front-loaded with no wasted text. While it may be under-specified, it efficiently communicates the core idea without unnecessary elaboration, earning full marks for brevity and structure.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It does not explain what 'Echo' entails operationally, such as whether it returns the input verbatim or processes it. For even a basic tool, more context on behavior and purpose would improve agent understanding, making the current description inadequate.

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%, with the parameter 'prompt' documented as 'Message to echo'. The description 'Echo' aligns with this but adds no further meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as examples or constraints. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the description does not compensate but also does not detract from parameter understanding.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Echo' is a tautology that essentially restates the tool name 'ping' without adding meaningful clarification. While both terms imply returning what was sent, the description fails to specify what resource or action is involved (e.g., echoing a message parameter). It does not distinguish this tool from potential siblings like 'ask-codex' or 'fetch-chunk' that might also involve response generation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines1/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or comparisons to sibling tools such as 'ask-codex' for queries or 'timeout-test' for testing. Without any usage instructions, the agent lacks direction on appropriate scenarios for invoking this tool.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/cexll/codex-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server