Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AnyBridge

AnyBridge

by ps-aditya
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

discover_capabilities

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists the CLI tools, web origins, and saved workflows AnyBridge can access on this machine so agents can check permissions before planning or running tasks. Read-only; call first.

Instructions

List what AnyBridge can reach on this machine: allowed CLI tools, allowed web origins, saved workflows. Call this first. Read-only.

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": "discover_capabilities"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so "Read-only" merely restates structured data. The genuinely additive behavioral content is the "Call this first" workflow ordering and the enumeration of what is returned; nothing is said about cost, latency, or how results are scoped to the machine.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the capability listing before the ordering cue and the safety note. No filler or repetition beyond the mild redundancy of "Read-only."

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?

For a simple read-only tool with no output schema the description covers the essentials, but the unexplained "query" parameter leaves an agent guessing at call semantics. Adding one clause about what query filters would make it complete.

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

Parameters2/5

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

There is one optional parameter, "query", with 0% schema description coverage, and the description never mentions it. An agent cannot tell whether query filters by tool name, origin, workflow title, or matches all categories, so the description fails to compensate for the schema gap.

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 (List) plus the exact resource categories returned: allowed CLI tools, allowed web origins, saved workflows. This makes it clearly the discovery/enumeration endpoint, distinct from siblings like execute_workflow or run_saved_workflow.

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?

"Call this first" gives explicit sequencing guidance that an agent can act on immediately. It does not name alternatives or when-not-to-call conditions, but for a first-step discovery tool the ordering cue covers the main decision.

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