Skip to main content
Glama
charliemtnez

ghost-inspector-mcp

by charliemtnez

Ghost Inspector: validate a definition without saving or submitting

gi_validate_test

Validate test definitions by running them in a real browser without saving or submitting forms, so you can confirm selectors resolve before editing.

Instructions

Runs a test definition through on-demand execution, which executes it and discards it — nothing in the account is created or changed. Use it to check that a selector chain still resolves before editing a test, and to check a definition you are authoring before saving it.

šŸ”“ It drives a real browser against a real URL, so it is an action with real-world effects even though nothing is saved. Two guards apply and neither can be turned off. Modules are inlined first, because a test whose steps are just execute calls hides its submit inside a module and guarding the definition as written would miss it. Then the run is truncated at the first step that could submit a form, and that step is replaced by an assertion on the same target — so the whole chain is verified, including that the submit control is reachable, without ever activating it. There is no way to make this tool submit; that stays a deliberate curl.

For an existing test the suite's viewport and browser are replicated, because tests inherit those and a selector can resolve on desktop and fail on mobile. Read ranAs.configSource to see what was actually used.

A browser run takes 20-100 seconds; the tool polls until it finishes. passing: null in the raw API means not finished, never failed.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dryRunNoReport exactly what would run — after modules are inlined and the submit guard applied — and stop. Nothing is sent to Ghost Inspector, no browser starts, no page loads, and no organization id is needed. Use it first on anything that touches production.
testIdNoExisting test to validate. Its suite's viewport and browser are replicated.
browserNoOverride, e.g. "chrome". Omit to replicate the suite's.
viewportNoOverride, e.g. "1280x800". Omit to replicate the suite's.
definitionNoAd-hoc definition to validate instead of an existing test.
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations say readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, but the description adds critical context: it drives a real browser against a real URL, inlines modules, truncates at the first submit-capable step, polls for 20-100 seconds, and explains that 'passing: null' means not finished. This goes far beyond the annotations.

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?

Though long, every paragraph earns its place: purpose, safety guard mechanics, browser/viewport context, and timing semantics. The structure is front-loaded with the core action and then progressively adds caveats, making the length justified for a tool with non-obvious execution behavior.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Despite no output schema, the description explains key return behavior (ranAs.configSource, passing:null) and runtime expectations. For a tool with nested inputs and real-world side effects, it covers the necessary context: use cases, safety guards, timing, and how to interpret results.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds context beyond the schema for browser/viewport by explaining why replication matters ('tests inherit those and a selector can resolve on desktop and fail on mobile'). It does not add new semantics for dryRun, but the schema already covers it thoroughly.

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 and resource: 'Runs a test definition through on-demand execution, which executes it and discards it.' It clearly differentiates from sibling tools by framing this as pre-save validation ('check that a selector chain still resolves before editing a test').

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description explicitly states when to use the tool: before editing a test to verify selectors, and before saving an authored definition. It also states a clear exclusion: 'There is no way to make this tool submit; that stays a deliberate curl.'

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/charliemtnez/ghost-inspector-mcp'

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