Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Grok Plugin Codex

Grok Plugin Codex

by handong66
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Export Grok Session

grok_export

Export a Grok session to Markdown. Provide session ID to retrieve formatted output for review or analysis.

Instructions

Wrap grok export and return Markdown from stdout by default.

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": {
      "sessionId": "<sessionId>"
    },
    "name": "grok_export"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cwdNoWorking directory for Grok. Defaults to the MCP server cwd.
grokBinNoExplicit Grok binary path. Defaults to GROK_BIN, ~/.grok/bin/grok, ~/.local/bin/grok, Homebrew paths, then PATH.
sessionIdYes
timeoutMsNo
outputFileNoOptional filesystem output path. Omit to return Markdown.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description reveals that the tool wraps a shell command and returns stdout as Markdown, and mentions an optional output file. However, it does not disclose side effects, required permissions, or what happens in error cases. Given no annotations, this is moderately transparent.

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?

The description is a single sentence that efficiently conveys the core function. No unnecessary words, though it could be slightly more structured.

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 the 5 parameters and no output schema, the description provides minimal completeness. It explains the default return behavior but omits details like error handling or default values for optional parameters.

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?

The input schema already covers 60% of parameters with descriptions. The tool description does not add any new semantic information beyond what is in the schema, so the baseline score applies.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the tool exports a Grok session and returns Markdown. The verb 'export' and resource 'Grok session' are specific, but it does not distinguish from siblings like 'grok_run' or 'grok_result'.

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 vs alternatives. The description does not provide context for when exporting is appropriate or mention any prerequisites.

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