Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
a11y-toolkit

a11y-toolkit

by kinti
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

a11y-toolkit: aria-live monitor snippet

a11y_aria_live_snippet
Read-onlyIdempotent

Inject JavaScript to log ARIA-live announcements with time, politeness, role, and text, showing what a screen reader would say on screen.

Instructions

Returns injectable JavaScript for an aria-live announcement monitor (bookmarklet or page.evaluate): logs every dynamic-region announcement with time, politeness, role and text — what a screen reader would say, visible on screen. — Diagnostics aid to inject in a browser; not an audit by itself. Returns the injectable JavaScript as text (bookmarklet or page.evaluate).

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": "a11y_aria_live_snippet"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
langNomonitor panel language (en default)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv3.12.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / lang / description
      Previous value: -"monitor panel language (es default)"New value: +"monitor panel language (en default)"
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv3.3.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / lang / description
      Previous value: -"Idioma del panel del monitor (es por defecto)"New value: +"monitor panel language (es default)"
  3. First observedv2.3.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With readOnlyHint/idempotentHint already covering the safety profile, the description adds real context: it produces a text artifact usable as a bookmarklet or page.evaluate payload, and it is a diagnostic rather than an audit. It still doesn't say whether the injected monitor auto-expires or how its output is captured.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded and readable, but it repeats itself: 'injectable JavaScript' and 'bookmarklet or page.evaluate' each appear twice across the description. Trimming the duplicated clause would make it tighter without losing meaning.

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

Completeness4/5

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

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by explaining that the return value is injectable JavaScript text and what the monitor logs once injected. For a single optional parameter tool this is nearly complete, though a note on where announcements surface (console/panel) is missing.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% (the lang enum is documented as 'monitor panel language (en default)'), so the schema carries the parameter burden. The description adds no detail about the lang option or its effect on output, so baseline 3 applies.

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+resource: it returns injectable JavaScript that monitors aria-live dynamic-region announcements, logging time, politeness, role and text. That is a distinct capability from siblings like a11y_sr_transcript or a11y_audit_dom, and an agent can tell what artifact it produces without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly frames the tool as a diagnostics aid to inject in a browser and warns that it is 'not an audit by itself', which tells the agent when this is and isn't the right pick. It does not name a specific alternative sibling to use instead, so it falls short of a 5.

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