Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
touch-browser

touch-browser

by nangman-infra
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

Touch Browser Status

tb_status

Returns the runtime and daemon capability status to verify the browser daemon is ready for commands.

Instructions

Return runtime and daemon capability status.

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": "tb_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statusYes
transportYes
versionYes
daemonYes
methodsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.7.0
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "daemon": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "methods": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "transport": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "version": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "status",
+    "transport",
+    "version",
+    "daemon",
+    "methods"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.11

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, so description should disclose behavior. It only says 'Return ... status' without detailing side effects, required permissions, or output structure. With output schema present, description doesn't reference it.

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?

Single, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous words. Efficiently conveys core purpose.

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?

For a simple, parameterless status tool, the description is adequate. Could optionally mention output schema, but not essential.

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?

No parameters exist, so description cannot add param meaning. Baseline 4 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage and zero params.

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 clearly states the tool returns 'runtime and daemon capability status', which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools that perform actions like clicking or opening.

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?

No guidance on when to use this status tool versus other tools. Doesn't mention alternatives or conditions for invocation.

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