Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Roblox Executor MCP Server

Roblox Executor MCP Server

by okenjioxx
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Probe Actors, LuaStateProxy, channels, and actor events

actor-capabilities
Read-onlyIdempotent

Inspect the complete Actors and LuaStateProxy surface for Roblox executors, including event objects and aliases, via a read-only matrix.

Instructions

Read-only matrix for Volt's complete Actors and LuaStateProxy surface, including event objects and aliases. Signature: { threadContext: number? }. Phase: verify; cost=medium; idempotency=read-only. Requires: active-client. Capabilities: getactors. Produces: structured-result. Safety: read-only. On failure: inspect tool-schema for exact fields, defaults, constraints, and an invocation example.

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": "actor-capabilities"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
threadContextNoOptional Roblox thread identity for this call; omit it to use the server default.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.0.0-spies.2

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotentHint/destructiveHint/openWorldHint, so 'idempotency=read-only' and 'Safety: read-only' add no value. The description does add cost=medium and the 'active-client' precondition, which are genuine context beyond the structured fields, but no return-shape or failure behavior detail.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The purpose leads, which is good, but the dash-separated metadata block is partly redundant ('idempotency=read-only', 'Safety: read-only' duplicate annotations) and 'idempotency=read-only' conflates two distinct properties. Some statements do not earn their place.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden but only says 'Produces: structured-result', which is too vague for a probe/matrix tool. 'On failure' guidance pointing to tool-schema helps, but what the matrix actually contains is underspecified.

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 coverage is 100% and there is a single optional threadContext whose schema description already explains it. 'Signature: { threadContext: number? }' merely restates the schema without adding format, default, or scoping meaning, so the 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 first sentence names a specific resource: a read-only matrix covering Actors, LuaStateProxy, event objects, and aliases. An agent can distinguish this enumeration/probe surface from siblings like list-actors or get-actor-details. It lacks an explicit contrast to those siblings, hence not a 5.

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?

'Phase: verify' and 'Requires: active-client' hint at a workflow position and a precondition, but the description never says when to choose this over list-actors, get-actor-details, or get-lua-state-actors. No when-not or alternative routing is provided.

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