Skip to main content
Glama
paramount-engineering

Roku Dev Studio MCP Server

by paramount-engineering
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Network Inspector: Find in Content

network_inspector_find
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search captured Roku network traffic to find requests containing specific value in URLs, headers, bodies. Use text or regex to locate session IDs, error strings, or JSON fields without paging through events.

Instructions

Search the FULL content of captured transactions — request/response URL, headers, and bodies — for query, unlike network_inspector_list_events' host filter which only matches hostname/SNI/URL. This is the tool for "which request(s) contain X" (a session id, an error string, a specific JSON field/value) across the whole buffer, without paging through every event with get_event_detail. Each result carries total (match count), scopes (per-scope breakdown: url/reqHeaders/reqBody/respHeaders/respBody), and the matching event's summary (host/url/method/status) inline. query is required; scopes optionally narrows which parts are searched (omit for all); caseSensitive (default false); regex treats query as a JS regex (a dangerous/over-long pattern safely degrades to a literal search rather than erroring). device optional — omit to search every Roku with captured traffic. limit caps results (default 50, max 500). Requires Network Inspector enabled (see network_inspector_status).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax matching events to return (default 50, max 500).
queryYesRequired. Text (or regex, with `regex: true`) to search for.
regexNoTreat `query` as a JS regular expression (default false).
deviceNoOptional Roku IP or serial. Omit to search every Roku with captured traffic.
scopesNoOptional. Which parts to search: url, reqHeaders, reqBody, respHeaders, respBody. Omit for all.
caseSensitiveNoCase-sensitive match (default false).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.0.2

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly, idempotent), the description discloses important runtime behavior: what parts are searched, the return shape (total, scopes, inline summary), and the safe degradation of dangerous/over-long regex patterns to literal search. It also communicates that omitting device searches all Rokus with captured traffic, which is non-obvious behavior an agent needs to know.

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 dense but front-loaded with the core distinguishing behavior first, then use cases, result summary, and parameter guidance. Every clause delivers actionable information, and the backtick-delimited parameter names improve scannability. The length is justified by the tool's six parameters and absence of an output schema.

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?

With no output schema, the description provides the essential return details inline (total, scopes, event summary) and covers all parameters, defaults, and the prerequisite. It also gives cross-references to sibling tools, leaving no significant gap for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Even though the schema already covers 100% of parameters, the description adds meaningful semantics for each one: query is required, scopes narrows search parts or defaults to all, caseSensitive defaults to false, regex has fallback behavior, device is optional and scoping is described, and limit has default/max values. This goes well beyond the schema's bare descriptions.

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 opens with a specific action and resource: 'Search the FULL content of captured transactions — request/response URL, headers, and bodies — for query'. It immediately contrasts itself with network_inspector_list_events' host filter and pinpoints the exact use case ('which request(s) contain X'), making its purpose unmistakable.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool versus siblings: it names network_inspector_list_events as the wrong tool for full-content search and get_event_detail as the slower, page-by-page alternative. It also states the prerequisite ('Requires Network Inspector enabled') and points to network_inspector_status, giving clear contextual guidance.

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