Skip to main content
Glama

romm_saves

List and filter save files for ROMs by game or platform to manage gaming progress across your collection.

Instructions

List save files. Filter by ROM or platform.

rom_id: Filter to a specific ROM (0 = all). platform_id: Filter to a specific platform (0 = all).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
rom_idNo
platform_idNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • The handler for the romm_saves tool, which fetches save file information from the ROMM API based on optional rom_id and platform_id filters.
    @mcp.tool()
    async def romm_saves(rom_id: int = 0, platform_id: int = 0) -> str:
        """List save files. Filter by ROM or platform.
    
        rom_id: Filter to a specific ROM (0 = all).
        platform_id: Filter to a specific platform (0 = all).
        """
        params: dict = {}
        if rom_id:
            params["rom_id"] = rom_id
        if platform_id:
            params["platform_id"] = platform_id
    
        data = await _get("saves", params=params)
    
        if not isinstance(data, list) or not data:
            qualifier = ""
            if rom_id:
                qualifier += f" for ROM {rom_id}"
            if platform_id:
                qualifier += f" on platform {platform_id}"
            return f"No saves found{qualifier}."
    
        lines = [f"Saves ({len(data)}):\n"]
        for s in data[:50]:
            fname = s.get("file_name", "?")
            size = s.get("file_size_bytes", 0)
            rom_name = s.get("rom_name", "")
            platform = s.get("platform_slug", "")
            updated = s.get("updated_at", "")
    
            line = f"  - {fname}"
            if rom_name:
                line += f" ({rom_name})"
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. It states it's a list operation, which implies read-only behavior, but doesn't mention any other traits like permissions needed, rate limits, or what the output contains. This leaves significant gaps for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose in the first sentence, followed by concise parameter explanations. Every sentence adds value without waste, making it efficient and well-structured.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (2 parameters, no nested objects) and the presence of an output schema (which handles return values), the description is mostly complete. It covers purpose and parameters well, but lacks behavioral details like error handling or pagination, which could be relevant for a list operation.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains both parameters ('rom_id' and 'platform_id'), their purpose ('Filter to a specific ROM/platform'), and special values (0 = all), adding meaningful semantics beyond the bare schema. However, it doesn't detail data types or constraints, keeping it from a perfect score.

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 verb 'List' and resource 'save files', making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate this tool from sibling tools like 'romm_search' or 'romm_library_items', which might also retrieve data, so it doesn't fully earn a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage by mentioning filtering options ('Filter by ROM or platform'), but it doesn't provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'romm_search' or 'romm_library_items'. It offers some context but lacks clear when/when-not instructions or named alternatives.

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