Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
pet-tools-mcp

pet-tools-mcp

by nschneir
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

pet_basic_type

Type BASIC program text into a running Commodore PET emulator, with an option to execute the program after typing.

Instructions

Type BASIC program text into the running PET via the keyboard (keywords may be upper or lower case; each line ends with \n). Set run=true to type RUN afterwards.

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": {
      "text": "<text>"
    },
    "name": "pet_basic_type"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
runNo
textYes
sessionNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description covers key behaviors: typing via keyboard, case insensitivity, and line endings. However, it does not disclose the effect of the session parameter, prerequisites (e.g., PET must be running), or potential side effects like overwriting existing program text.

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 highly concise with two sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: first describes the main action, second adds the optional run behavior. No superfluous words.

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?

Given the tool has three parameters and no output schema, the description covers the primary action but omits the session parameter and any prerequisites for use (e.g., PET session must be active). This leaves gaps in fully understanding the tool's context.

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 description explains two of three parameters (text and run) beyond the schema, noting text as BASIC program lines and run as typing RUN. The session parameter is not mentioned at all, leaving its meaning unclear.

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 types BASIC program text into the PET via keyboard, with explicit details on case insensitivity and line endings. It distinguishes from sibling tools like pet_run (which presumably runs a program) by focusing on inputting text programmatically.

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?

The description does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as pet_load or pet_run. It only hints that setting run=true will type RUN afterwards, but no comparisons or when-not conditions are given.

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