Skip to main content
Glama
okenjioxx

Roblox Executor MCP Server

by okenjioxx
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Runtime perf snapshot (FPS, frame time, camera, players)

get-render-stats
Read-onlyIdempotent

Capture a read-only one-shot performance snapshot: physics FPS, frame and heartbeat timing, camera position/FOV, player count, and game time to debug client health.

Instructions

In-game performance/runtime snapshot taken at the instant of the call. Reports: the physics frame rate from workspace:GetRealPhysicsFPS(); engine timing from game:GetService('Stats') when available (FrameTime in seconds and HeartbeatTimeMs); the current camera's world position (from its CFrame) and FieldOfView; the live player count from #Players:GetPlayers(); and workspace.DistributedGameTime (server-synchronized clock). Use this for a one-shot health read while debugging (is the client dropping frames? where is the camera? how many players are present?), or to capture a baseline before/after an exploit to see its perf impact. Every field is independently pcall-guarded and reported as null when unavailable, so the tool always returns a partial snapshot rather than failing. Requires nothing beyond a live game. Returns { physicsFPS, frameTimeSeconds, heartbeatTimeMs, camera: { position, fieldOfView }, playerCount, distributedGameTime } or { error }. Signature: { threadContext: number? }. Phase: observe; cost=medium; idempotency=read-only. Requires: active-client. Produces: structured-observation, diagnostic-report. Safety: read-only. On failure: inspect tool-schema for exact fields, defaults, constraints, and an invocation example.

Input Schema

TableJSON 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

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds substantial extra context: every field is pcall-guarded and reported as null when unavailable, the tool always returns a partial snapshot rather than failing, and it requires nothing beyond a live game. It also states the on-failure path and the return shape.

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?

Front-loaded: the opening sentence gives purpose, followed by reported fields, usage, failure semantics, then metadata. Mostly earns its place, but the tail (Phase/cost/idempotency/Safety: read-only) partly duplicates the annotations and the opening, adding mild redundancy.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description correctly carries the burden by enumerating the returned object fields and the { error } fallback, plus prerequisites ('Requires: active-client') and a pointer to tool-schema for exact fields. Nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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 optional threadContext parameter is fully documented in the schema (100% coverage), and the description's 'Signature: { threadContext: number? }' merely restates it. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting and the description adds no new parameter meaning.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('in-game performance/runtime snapshot') and then enumerates exactly what it reports (physics FPS, FrameTime, HeartbeatTimeMs, camera CFrame/FOV, player count, DistributedGameTime). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get-memory-stats, get-game-info, and get-fps-cap.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives concrete when-to-use contexts ('one-shot health read while debugging… is the client dropping frames? where is the camera?') and a baseline before/after an exploit. However it names no alternative sibling to use instead or any when-not condition, so it stops short of the top tier.

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