kde-desktop-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

kde_capabilities

Read-only

Reports supported operations and known limitations for a selected desktop target, so clients can verify available automation actions and constraints before sending commands.

Instructions

Report supported operations and known limitations for a selected target.

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": {
      "session": "<session>"
    },
    "name": "kde_capabilities"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`session`	Yes	Required target selector: a managed private session ID, or the exact value 'user-desktop' to explicitly opt into the real user desktop.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that 'known limitations' are reported, which usefully signals the agent may learn an operation is unsupported, but with no output schema it does not describe the shape or granularity of what is returned.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

One sentence with zero filler and the target scoping stated up front. It is efficient, though its terseness is close to under-specification rather than tight completeness.

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 discovery tool with no output schema, the description should say what the report contains and when to consult it. It names the two categories returned but omits return detail and pre-call guidance, leaving an agent to call it speculatively.

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?

The single 'session' parameter is fully documented in the schema (100% coverage), including the pattern and the 'user-desktop' opt-in. The description's phrase 'selected target' adds no meaning beyond that, so baseline 3 applies.

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 gives a specific verb ('Report') and a concrete resource ('supported operations and known limitations'), scoped to 'a selected target' (the session). An agent can tell this is a capability-discovery tool rather than an action tool, though it never names or contrasts any sibling.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternative tool is mentioned. The value of checking capabilities before attempting operations on a session is left entirely implicit.

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