PCSX2 MCP

by snowyegret23

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

list_debug_breakpoints

List all active breakpoints and their conditions in the PCSX2 debugger to inspect execution control points.

Instructions

List PCSX2 debugger breakpoints and conditions.

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": "list_debug_breakpoints"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`target`	No		ee

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 27, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behavior. It does not mention whether the tool is read-only, what output format is returned, or any side effects. Simply stating 'list' is insufficient.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is short and to the point, but lacks critical details that would justify its brevity. It could be more informative without losing conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity and the lack of output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what 'conditions' refers to, how breakpoints are represented, or any pagination or filtering behavior.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%. The only parameter 'target' is not explained in the description (e.g., meaning, possible values, or default implications). No enums or constraints are provided.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'PCSX2 debugger breakpoints and conditions'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like set_breakpoint or remove_breakpoint by focusing on listing.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., list_breakpoint_kinds). Context such as prerequisites or typical usage scenarios is missing.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.