Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Local MCP

Local MCP

by colibird-ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

request_feature

Submit a feature request to Local MCP for new capabilities, missing tools, or app integrations. Describe what you need built.

Instructions

Submits a feature request to the LMCP team — a new capability, a tool that doesn't exist yet, or an app/int...

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": "request_feature"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv3.0.352
  2. Removedv3.0.341
  3. Addedv3.0.330
  4. Removed
  5. Addedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, permissions needed, or rate limits. Minimal disclosure leaves the agent uninformed.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is short but incomplete due to truncation. It conveys the core idea efficiently but lacks a complete sentence structure.

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?

Given no parameters, no output schema, and a simple function, the description provides minimal context. It does not describe what happens after submission or any confirmation, leaving some gaps.

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 has zero parameters; the input schema is empty with 100% coverage. The description does not need to add parameter details, and it meets the baseline for a no-parameter tool.

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?

The description states it submits a feature request to the LMCP team, listing examples. However, the text cuts off, making it incomplete. The general purpose is clear, but specificity and completeness are lacking.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Among many sibling tools, this is unique, but the description does not provide context for its use or any exclusions.

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