Skip to main content
Glama
healkeiser

fxhoudinimcp

by healkeiser
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_cache_status

Poll cache write progress for a node path: returns whether all expected frames are on disk, which are missing, and if writing is still active.

Instructions

Frames on disk for a cache node, against the range it is set to write.

This is what to poll after a background write_cache: complete is true when every frame of expected_range is on disk, missing_frames lists the rest, writing is true while files are still arriving, and hint tells you when the finished cache is not yet loaded from disk. Never wait for a cache with a shell loop; call this between other work.

Args: ctx: MCP context. node_path: Path to the cache node.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
node_pathYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.24.1
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations and no output schema, the description carries the full burden and discloses the return semantics: complete, missing_frames, writing, and hint. It also explains the non-blocking polling behavior. It stops short of stating read-only/no-side-effect profile explicitly, but the behavioral context is strong.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose, then usage, then the field meanings. The return-field enumeration is dense but each sentence earns its place. Slightly verbose field listing keeps it from a 5.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a read-only status tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage timing, and the meaning of each return field. Nothing an agent needs to poll correctly is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 0% and the single required parameter node_path has no schema description, yet the description glosses it as 'Path to the cache node,' adding needed meaning. This adequately compensates for the gap, though a note on accepted path forms would strengthen it.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: reports frames on disk for a cache node against the range it is set to write. This cleanly distinguishes it from siblings like list_caches, write_cache, and clear_cache.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly names the triggering context ('what to poll after a background write_cache') and gives a clear anti-pattern instruction ('Never wait for a cache with a shell loop; call this between other work'). The agent knows exactly when and how to use it.

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