Adjust debug log levels and categories to control output from Electron app testing. Set minimum level and add or remove log categories.
Configure debug settings including log levels and categories.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| level | No | New minimum log level | |
| categories | No | New log categories | |
| addCategories | No | Categories to add | |
| removeCategories | No | Categories to remove |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.3Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It says nothing about whether this mutates persisted state, how long the change lasts, whether it requires elevated permissions, or what it returns. The set/merge semantics of categories versus addCategories/removeCategories are also unexplained.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single efficient sentence with the resource front-loaded. It is not padded, though it is arguably too terse to carry the needed behavioral and usage context.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a 4-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description omits the key ambiguity: whether 'categories' replaces the current set while addCategories/removeCategories modify it, and what happens on success. It is under-specified for the tool's complexity.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so each parameter is already documented in the schema, establishing a baseline of 3. The description's mention of 'log levels and categories' aligns with the schema but adds no syntax, defaulting, or precedence detail beyond it.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb (configure) and resource (debug settings), and enumerates the sub-fields (log levels and categories). However, it does not distinguish itself from siblings like enable_debug, disable_debug, or get_debug_status, so an agent must infer the split.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternative tools. Given siblings such as enable_debug, disable_debug, and get_debug_status, the agent gets no help deciding when fine-grained configuration is appropriate versus the simpler toggle tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.