Skip to main content
Glama
kta41

PoC Recorder MCP Server

by kta41
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Record Web PoC Video (MP4 / GIF)

record-poc

Capture automated video walkthroughs of web or localhost PoCs with virtual cursor, click ripples, HUD captions, and dummy-data injection. Export MP4 or GIF.

Instructions

Record an automated video walkthrough of a web PoC or localhost service with an animated virtual cursor, click ripples, optional step HUD captions, and dummy data injection (localStorage, sessionStorage, HTTP route mocks, HTML replacements, or post-load JS). Outputs H.264 .mp4, palette-optimized .gif, or both.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fpsNoFrame rate for GIF/MP4 conversion (default 15).
urlYesTarget web service URL to record (e.g. `http://localhost:47891`).
stepsNoOrdered sequence of browser interactions to perform during the recording.
widthNoViewport and video width in pixels (default 1440).
formatNoOutput video format: `mp4` (H.264), `gif` (2-pass palette), `both` (generates .mp4 and .gif), or `webm`.both
heightNoViewport and video height in pixels (default 900).
show_hudNoShow bottom HUD banner when steps include a `caption`.
gif_widthNoTarget width in pixels for GIF output (preserves aspect ratio with Lanczos scaling).
init_scriptNoOptional JavaScript snippet injected via `context.add_init_script` before page load.
mock_routesNoOptional HTTP route mocks returning dummy JSON/text responses for matching requests.
output_pathYesDestination file path (or base path when `format='both'`). Relative paths resolve against the configured output directory or current working directory.
show_cursorNoShow animated virtual cursor and click ripples in the recording.
post_load_jsNoOptional JavaScript executed immediately after initial page load (e.g. to inject dummy datasets and re-render before choreography starts).
local_storageNoKey-value entries pre-populated into `window.localStorage` before page scripts run (values may be strings or JSON objects).
session_storageNoKey-value entries pre-populated into `window.sessionStorage` before page scripts run.
html_replacementsNoOptional HTML response replacements applied on the fly to the main document before rendering.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose useful behavior: virtual cursor animation, click ripples, HUD captions, injection methods, and concrete output formats. However it omits operational traits an agent needs — a browser/runtime requirement, execution time or duration limits, and that injecting JS/eval and writing files are side effects.

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?

Two sentences, no filler: the capability list comes first and the output formats are front-loaded in the closing clause. Every phrase maps to a real behavior of the tool.

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 16-parameter, high-complexity tool with no output schema, the description covers capability and output formats but not the workflow shape (ordering of steps/injections), prerequisites, or error/failure behavior. Adequate but with clear gaps given the tool's complexity.

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 100%, so the structured fields already define the 16 parameters and the baseline is 3. The description goes further by mapping 'dummy data injection' into its concrete mechanisms (localStorage, sessionStorage, HTTP route mocks, HTML replacements, post-load JS), giving the agent a useful conceptual index into the parameters.

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 (Record) and a well-scoped resource: an automated video walkthrough of a web PoC or localhost service. The explicit mention of output artifacts (.mp4/.gif via animated cursor, HUD captions, dummy-data injection) makes it unmistakably distinct from siblings like list-recordings, inspect-page, and run-scenario.

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?

The description explains what the tool produces but never says when to reach for it versus siblings such as run-scenario or inspect-page, nor any when-not conditions. Usage is only inferable from the mention of a 'steps' choreography.

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