Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
umbra

umbra

by lxchx
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Har Record Stop

har_record_stop

Stops HAR recording for a specified tab while retaining buffered entries; use har_dump to retrieve them or har_clear to discard.

Instructions

Stop recording (keeps buffered entries — call har_dump to retrieve, har_clear to drop).

Ex: har_record_stop('t0') → {"recording":false,"entries":42}

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": {
      "tab_id": "<tab_id>"
    },
    "name": "har_record_stop"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tab_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the crucial side effect: buffered entries are kept, and recording becomes false. The example return shape reinforces this. It does not state what happens if the tab is not currently recording, nor whether the call is idempotent, which keeps it short of a 5.

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 compact lines with the primary behavior front-loaded and the follow-up routing immediately after. Every sentence earns its place; no filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so the return example is supplementary. The description covers the key state change and follow-up paths, but for a mutation tool with no annotations it leaves open the not-currently-recording case and error behavior.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. The example call har_record_stop('t0') shows tab_id in use, which adds some meaning beyond the bare schema. However, it never defines what tab_id refers to or its format, so the compensation is partial.

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 and resource ('Stop recording') and immediately names the two sibling tools that matter for follow-up (har_dump, har_clear). An agent can distinguish this from har_record_start, har_dump, and har_clear without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly tells the agent what to do after stopping: call har_dump to retrieve buffered entries, or har_clear to drop them. That is a clear when/where-next routing that removes ambiguity among its closest siblings.

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