Skip to main content
Glama
sassyconsultingllc

SassyMCP

Official
by sassyconsultingllc
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

sassy_toast

Send a desktop notification to alert when a long-running task finishes. Supports Windows, macOS, and Linux with automatic fallback per platform.

Instructions

Shows a desktop notification on the machine running SassyMCP; no files or data are changed. Routed per platform: Windows tries BurntToast, then .NET toast, then msg.exe; macOS uses osascript; Linux uses notify-send and fails if libnotify is not installed. title and message are required; duration accepts short or long (default short) and anything else is treated as short, mapping to normal or critical urgency on Linux. Returns sent or failed plus the method used, with a 10-second per-method timeout. Use it to alert on completion of a long-running task the user is watching for.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleYes
messageYes
durationNoshort

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv1.15.1
    • addedOutput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +true
    • removedOutput schema / properties
      Removed value: -{
-  "result": {
-    "title": "Result",
-    "type": "string"
-  }
-}
    • removedOutput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "result"
-]
    • changedOutput schema / title
      Previous value: -"sassy_toastOutput"New value: +"sassy_toastDictOutput"
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes well beyond the annotations. It discloses that the tool is non-destructive ('no files or data are changed'), explains the per-platform fallback chain (BurntToast → .NET toast → msg.exe on Windows, osascript on macOS, notify-send on Linux), describes the duration mapping ('short or long... anything else is treated as short, mapping to normal or critical urgency on Linux'), and reveals the 10-second per-method timeout. It also states the return value ('sent or failed plus the method used'). This is rich behavioral context that annotations alone do not provide.

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 dense but well-organized: it front-loads the core purpose and non-destructive nature, then details platform routing, parameters, return value, and use case. Every sentence adds information. It is slightly long, but the complexity of the platform-specific behavior justifies the length.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (3 params, platform-specific behavior, output schema present), the description covers all essential aspects: what it does, what it doesn't do, platform requirements, parameter semantics, timeout behavior, return value, and a concrete use case. The output schema exists, so the description needn't detail the return structure further. Nothing an agent needs to invoke this correctly is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden for parameter semantics. It explains that title and message are required, and it defines the duration parameter's allowed values and their behavior ('short or long (default short) and anything else is treated as short, mapping to normal or critical urgency on Linux'). This adds meaning beyond the bare schema, though it doesn't describe title/message content constraints (e.g., length limits), which is a minor 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Shows a desktop notification on the machine running SassyMCP'. It also clarifies that no files or data are changed, which distinguishes it from file-manipulation siblings like sassy_write_file, sassy_edit_block, and sassy_safe_delete. The purpose is unambiguous and immediately actionable.

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?

The description explicitly says 'Use it to alert on completion of a long-running task the user is watching for,' which gives a clear when-to-use scenario. It also explains platform-specific routing and failure conditions (e.g., Linux fails if libnotify is not installed), which helps an agent decide whether this tool is appropriate in the current environment. No alternative tool is named, but the use case is specific enough that an agent can distinguish it from siblings.

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