Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
agy-profiles

agy-profiles

by harrymove-ctrl
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

profile_launch

Launch Antigravity Hub or IDE inside an isolated profile directory to keep each workspace sandboxed and separate.

Instructions

Launch Antigravity Hub or IDE strictly sandboxed inside the profile directory.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "profile_launch"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
targetNo
workspaceNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose one useful trait, that the launch is strictly sandboxed within the profile directory, but says nothing about whether the call is blocking, long-running, what it returns, or what happens if the profile is already running.

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?

A single tight sentence with the scoping constraint front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though its brevity comes at the cost of the missing information noted elsewhere.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a mutation/process-launch tool with no annotations, no output schema, and zero parameter documentation, the description is too thin. An agent lacks what it needs to know about prerequisites, return behavior, and the workspace parameter.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% across three parameters. The description only loosely hints at `name` (the profile directory) and the hub/ide target; the `workspace` parameter is never explained at all, and no format or default details are given.

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?

Names a specific verb ("Launch") and two concrete targets (Antigravity Hub or IDE) plus the scoping constraint "inside the profile directory." It is distinguishable from siblings like profile_create or profile_stop, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with them.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g., must the profile exist first?), and no mention of alternatives such as launcher_build or profile_stop. The agent must infer the call context entirely.

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