Skip to main content
Glama

romm_platforms

List available gaming platforms with their ROM counts to help users organize and manage their game collections effectively.

Instructions

List platforms with ROM counts.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • Implementation of the romm_platforms tool, which fetches platform data and formats it into a list of strings showing ROM counts, sizes, and platform IDs.
    async def romm_platforms() -> str:
        """List platforms with ROM counts."""
        data = await _get("platforms")
        if not isinstance(data, list):
            return "No platforms found."
    
        platforms = sorted(data, key=lambda p: p.get("rom_count", 0), reverse=True)
        if not platforms:
            return "No platforms found."
    
        lines = [f"Platforms ({len(platforms)}):\n"]
        for p in platforms:
            name = p.get("display_name") or p.get("name", "Unknown")
            slug = p.get("slug", "?")
            count = p.get("rom_count", 0)
            size = p.get("fs_size_bytes", 0)
            pid = p.get("id", "?")
    
            line = f"  {name} ({slug})"
            line += f" — {count} ROM{'s' if count != 1 else ''}"
            if size:
                line += f", {_fmt_size(size)}"
            lines.append(line)
            lines.append(f"    ID: {pid}")
    
        return "\n".join(lines)
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'List' implies a read-only operation, the description doesn't specify whether this requires authentication, what format the output takes, whether it's paginated, or if there are rate limits. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its 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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that communicates the core functionality without any wasted words. It's front-loaded with the essential information ('List platforms') and adds only necessary qualifying detail ('with ROM counts'). Every word earns its place.

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?

Given that the tool has no parameters, an output schema exists (which should document return values), and the operation appears to be a simple read, the description is minimally adequate. However, without annotations to clarify behavioral aspects like authentication or rate limits, and with many potentially overlapping sibling tools, the description could do more to establish context and boundaries.

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 tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema fully documents the absence of inputs. The description appropriately doesn't waste space discussing parameters that don't exist, maintaining focus on what the tool does rather than what it accepts. This meets the baseline expectation for parameterless tools.

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 clearly states the action ('List') and resource ('platforms'), with additional context about what information is included ('with ROM counts'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like romm_devices or romm_firmware by focusing specifically on platforms. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from romm_collections or romm_library_items which might also list platforms, so it's not a perfect 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools like romm_collections, romm_search, and romm_library_items that might overlap in functionality, there's no indication of when this specific listing tool is preferred or what its scope limitations are.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/lodordev/mcp-romm'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server