Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
dzstudio-mcp

dzstudio-mcp

by siemendev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

login

Authenticate to a dzStudio server via browser code confirmation; first call returns address and code, second completes sign-in. Pass a name for name-only local servers.

Instructions

Sign in to a server with a code the user confirms in the browser. The first call returns the address and code to give to the user; call it again after they confirmed. The login is kept across restarts. For servers in a local network that only accept a name, pass name.

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": "login"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoDisplay name, only for servers that log in by name
serverNoServer name; default: the first configured server

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.3

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does a solid job: it discloses that the first call returns an address and code, that a second call is required after user confirmation, and that the login persists across restarts (state durability). It does not cover failure modes, what happens if the user never confirms, or whether the call blocks.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and the two-step flow, then the persistence note and the parameter caveat. Nothing is padded and every sentence adds information.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential loop (call, show code to user, call again) and the persistence behavior. What the second call returns and how failures surface are left unstated, which is a modest gap rather than a blocking one.

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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented in structured form. The description restates the `name` case in slightly more operational terms (local-network servers that only accept a name) but says nothing about the `server` parameter beyond what the schema already states about the default.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource ("Sign in to a server") and immediately frames the unusual two-phase nature of the operation. It is clearly distinct from siblings like list_servers and add_server, though it never names a sibling to route against.

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?

It gives explicit sequencing guidance: call once to get the address and code for the user, then call again after they confirm. It also states the condition for using the `name` parameter (local-network servers that only accept a name). It stops short of naming alternatives or when-not-to-use cases.

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