Argus

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Check Responsive Layout

check_layout

Read-onlyIdempotent

Scans web app layouts for bounded overflow, clipping, target-size, and overlay signals, returning QA leads to review rather than confirmed bugs.

Instructions

Read bounded overflow, clipping, target-size and overlay signals. These are leads, not automatic bugs.

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": "check_layout"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	No
`run_id`	Yes
`stages`	No
`status`	Yes
`recovery`	No
`operation`	Yes
`error_code`	Yes
`session_state`	Yes
`schema_version`	No
`progress_omitted`	No
`progress_delivery_failed`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.10.0Oct 26, 2026
- removedInput schema / title
```
Removed value: -"check_layoutArguments"
```
Changed12 schema fields changedOct 26, 2026
- removedOutput schema / properties / data / title
```
Removed value: -"Data"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / error_code / title
```
Removed value: -"Error Code"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / operation / title
```
Removed value: -"Operation"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / progress_delivery_failed / title
```
Removed value: -"Progress Delivery Failed"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / progress_omitted / title
```
Removed value: -"Progress Omitted"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / recovery / title
```
Removed value: -"Recovery"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / run_id / title
```
Removed value: -"Run Id"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / schema_version / title
```
Removed value: -"Schema Version"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / session_state / title
```
Removed value: -"Session State"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / stages / title
```
Removed value: -"Stages"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / status / title
```
Removed value: -"Status"
```
- removedOutput schema / title
```
Removed value: -"AgentResult"
```
Addedv0.5.2Oct 26, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description does add genuine behavioral value by framing the output as heuristic leads requiring human judgment rather than confirmed defects, but says nothing about session/auth requirements or scope of what is inspected.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler, and the signal list is front-loaded. Brevity is close to over-terseness here, but nothing is redundant.

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?

With zero params, an output schema, and full annotations, the structural burden is low and the description covers the essential caveat about interpreting results. It remains incomplete because it never states prerequisites (an active session/emulated device) or which of the many sibling inspection tools this complements.

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 zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to document; the baseline of 4 applies. The description's only relevant claim is that the scan is 'bounded', which hints at a scoping limit without needing parameters.

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

Purpose3/5

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

Names four specific signal categories (overflow, clipping, target-size, overlay) that distinguish it from siblings like get_errors or observe, but the verb 'read' is awkward for an analysis tool and the description never states it inspects the current page's rendered layout. An agent can guess the domain but not the mechanism.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No when-to-use guidance and no alternatives named — an agent cannot tell from this text whether to run check_layout before or instead of regression_check, observe, or get_errors. The only guidance offered is interpretive ('leads, not automatic bugs'), which is not a usage rule.

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