Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
snapmcp

snapmcp

by reeinharddd
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

snapmcp-hint

Select a topic to get targeted help for setup, diagnostics, browser, themes, output, security, GIFs, documents, and batch capture. Resolve issues and uncover features with actionable hints.

Instructions

Return a helpful hint about configuring and using snapmcp. Provides contextual guidance for setup, troubleshooting, and feature discovery.

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": "snapmcp-hint"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
topicNoTopic for targeted help: init (interactive setup), doctor (diagnostics), browser (Chrome profile), themes (27 syntax themes), output (capture directory), security (SSRF/path config), gif (animations), document (multi-capture docs), batch (multi-capture calls)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.3.4
    • changedInput schema / properties / topic / description
      Previous value: -"Optional topic: init, doctor, browser, themes, output"New value: +"Topic for targeted help: init (interactive setup), doctor (diagnostics), browser (Chrome profile), themes (27 syntax themes), output (capture directory), security (SSRF/path config), gif (animations), document (multi-capture docs), batch (multi-capture calls)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / topic / enum
      Added value: +[
+  "init",
+  "doctor",
+  "browser",
+  "themes",
+  "output",
+  "security",
+  "gif",
+  "document",
+  "batch"
+]
  2. First observedv2.3.2

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool returns a hint, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't explicitly mention that it creates no side effects or external calls. For this simple tool, the omission is not misleading, but it adds little beyond the obvious.

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?

The description is concise at two sentences, but there is slight redundancy: 'Return a helpful hint' and 'Provides contextual guidance' communicate essentially the same function. Still, it is front-loaded with the core purpose and avoids unnecessary detail.

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?

For a simple tool with one optional enum parameter and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It explains the tool's purpose and scope, and the schema covers the parameter. It doesn't specify the return format, but for a hint tool, a text string is naturally implied.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with a single optional `topic` parameter fully enumerated and explained. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate given the schema already handles the documentation.

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 clearly states the tool returns a helpful hint about configuring and using snapmcp, using a specific verb ('Return') and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling capture_* tools, which are all about capturing content, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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?

The description provides clear context for when to use the tool: when needing guidance for setup, troubleshooting, or feature discovery. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, but the sibling tools are so different in purpose that no exclusion is necessary.

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