Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-vcd

mcp-vcd

by key2
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get-signal-with-format

Retrieve signal values from a VCD file, applying .gtkw display hints for formatting. Specify the signal name and optional time range to get values.

Instructions

Get signal values from a VCD file, formatted according to .gtkw display hints

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": {
      "gtkw_file": "<gtkw_file>",
      "vcd_file": "<vcd_file>",
      "signal_name": "<signal_name>"
    },
    "name": "get-signal-with-format"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
end_timeNoEnd timestamp (optional)
vcd_fileYesPath to the VCD file
gtkw_fileYesPath to the .gtkw file
start_timeNoStart timestamp (optional)
signal_nameYesSignal name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations are absent, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It reveals that output is formatted according to a .gtkw file, but does not explain what that formatting entails, whether the operation is read-only, how start/end_time affect results, or error/return behavior.

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?

One concise sentence that is front-loaded with the key action and resource. No redundant words.

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?

The description is minimal: no output schema, no annotations, and no explanation of the formatting behavior or return format. While the schema covers parameters, the tool's core promise ('formatted according to .gtkw display hints') is left undefined, making it insufficient for reliable selection.

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?

All five parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; gtkw_file and vcd_file are understandable but no further semantics are provided.

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 ('Get') and resource ('signal values from a VCD file'), and adds a distinguishing formatting qualifier ('.gtkw display hints'). However, it does not explicitly contrast with the sibling tool 'get-signal', so the differentiation is implicit rather than explicit.

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 statement of when to use this tool over alternatives like 'get-signal' or 'get-bus-signals' is provided. The description implies use when formatted output is desired, but gives no exclusions or alternative guidance.

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