Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ESP Input Bridge

ESP Input Bridge

by jensengao194-spec
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

observe

Read-only

Reads the current desktop target state and returns a fresh observation ID, optionally including a cropped image, so agents can inspect before acting.

Instructions

Read target state and a fresh observation ID; optionally include a cropped image.

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": "observe"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
imageNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.1

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the tool returns target state and a fresh observation ID and can optionally include a cropped image, but it does not explain what 'target state' contains or how the observation ID should be used.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every clause contributes either the core action, the return value, or the optional parameter.

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?

For a simple read-only tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essentials. However, it leaves important context implicit, such as what the observation ID is for and how this tool relates to 'act' and 'stop'.

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 single 'image' parameter is described in prose as 'optionally include a cropped image', which gives its meaning despite 0% schema description coverage. It does not explain crop details or the default behavior, but it adequately compensates for the schema gap on the only parameter.

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 uses a specific verb ('Read') and names the resources ('target state' and 'fresh observation ID'), so the tool's purpose is clear. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling tools 'act' and 'stop', which keeps it from a 5.

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 explicit guidance on when to use 'observe' versus 'act' or 'stop', nor any when-not-to-use conditions. The phrase 'optionally include a cropped image' describes a parameter, not usage context.

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