Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Roblox Executor MCP Server

Roblox Executor MCP Server

by okenjioxx
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Scan closures by source

scan-closures-by-source
Read-onlyIdempotent

Locate getgc closures by matching a substring in their debug source, so you can inspect specific Luau functions in a live Roblox client.

Instructions

Find getgc closures whose debug source contains a target substring. Signature: { sourceQuery: string, limit: any?, includeCClosures: any?, threadContext: number? }. Phase: observe; cost=high; idempotency=read-only. Requires: active-client. Capabilities: getgc, debug closure primitives. Produces: bounded-candidates. Safety: read-only. On failure: inspect tool-schema for exact fields, defaults, constraints, and an invocation example.

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": {
      "sourceQuery": "<sourceQuery>"
    },
    "name": "scan-closures-by-source"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoOptional hard result/work budget used to keep output and runtime bounded.
sourceQueryYessearch text used to filter and rank bounded results.
threadContextNoOptional Roblox thread identity for this call; omit it to use the server default.
includeCClosuresNoWhether to include cclosures in the bounded result.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.0.0-spies.2

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world, so the bar is lower. The description adds genuinely new context: cost=high, requires an active client, phase=observe, and that output is bounded-candidates. It does not detail pagination or result shape, but that is a minor gap given the annotation coverage.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence and the metadata is compact and structured. Minor redundancy: 'Safety: read-only' and 'idempotency=read-only' partly duplicate the readOnlyHint/idempotentHint annotations.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description carries return-value burden, and 'Produces: bounded-candidates' plus cost=high gives an adequate sense of output and expense. The active-client prerequisite is stated. Only minor gaps (exact result shape) remain for a read-only scan tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters including defaults and constraints. The description only restates the signature with types and adds no semantic meaning beyond the schema, 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?

States a specific verb (Find), resource (getgc closures), and a precise filter scope (debug source contains a target substring), which inherently separates it from the by-name sibling. It does not explicitly name scan-closures-by-name as the alternative, so the differentiation is left implicit.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Provides context markers ('Phase: observe', 'Requires: active-client') that imply when the tool is applicable, but offers no explicit when-to-use versus the by-name/by-source sibling or any exclusion conditions. Guidance is implied rather than stated.

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