Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
vision-mcp

vision-mcp

by forloopcodes
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

screen

Capture a screenshot of an application window by specifying its process name or process ID.

Instructions

Capture a screenshot of an application window by PID or process name (e.g. wezterm)

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "action": "<action>"
    },
    "name": "screen"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionYesCapture action (only capture for now)
targetNoProcess name (e.g. wezterm, notepad)
pidNoProcess ID to capture

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It states that a screenshot is captured, but does not disclose any side effects, permissions required, or behavior beyond the basic action.

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 sentence with an example, no redundant information. Every word serves a purpose.

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?

While the tool is simple, the description lacks information about what is returned (e.g., image data or path). The enum for action is limited but not explained. For a complete agent, return type would be useful.

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 input schema already describes each parameter (action, target, pid) with 100% coverage. The description adds value by explaining that target and pid are alternative ways to specify the window, and provides an example.

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 clearly states the purpose: capture a screenshot of an application window using PID or process name. It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'analyze_image', which implies analysis rather than capture.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides two methods (PID or process name) and gives an example (wezterm). However, it does not specify when to use this tool over alternatives 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