Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
smolmux

smolmux

by magnusmalm
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

serial_monitor

Read-only

Listen to a serial device for a set time (default 30s, max 300s) and return its output plus any anomalies. Use this when you don't know what output to expect.

Instructions

Listen for a fixed time (default 30 s, max 300 s) and return what the device printed plus anomalies in that window. Use when you do not know what to expect; when you do, serial_wait_for returns as soon as it matches.

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": "serial_monitor"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
duration_secondsNoHow long to monitor (max 300 seconds, default 30).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With annotations already declaring readOnlyHint, openWorldHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, the description adds valuable behavioral context: the default and maximum listening duration, and that it returns both raw output and anomalies. It doesn't cover potential blocking behavior or output format details, but the added context is meaningful.

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 tightly written sentences with no waste. The core purpose and duration constraints are front-loaded, followed immediately by the usage rule and alternative.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description provides everything an agent needs: what it does, when to use it, how long it runs, and what it returns. Annotations already cover safety, so no critical gaps remain.

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%, so the single parameter is fully documented in the schema. The description repeats the default (30 s) and max (300 s) without adding new syntax or format details beyond what the schema provides, which is the baseline 3.

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?

The description states a specific verb (listen), resource (device output and anomalies), and scope (fixed time window), clearly distinguishing it from serial_wait_for. It also implicitly differentiates from read-once siblings like serial_read by emphasizing monitoring over a duration.

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?

It explicitly states when to use this tool ('when you do not know what to expect') and names the alternative serial_wait_for for when you do know what to expect. This is a textbook when/when-not/alternative guidance.

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