Skip to main content
Glama

validation_check

Run browser-based validation on web pages: full health check with assertions and screenshots, or quick verification with low token usage. Also supports deployment verification without a browser.

Instructions

单项验证检查工具(v1.9.5 起合并 validation_quick_run)。通过 mode 参数区分子模式:basic(默认,执行完整浏览器健康检查:打开 URL、等待条件、执行断言、截图留证、统计错误)/ quick(低 Token 快速验证,等价于已废弃的 validation_quick_run)。仍支持 check_type=deploy_verify 执行部署验证。

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlNo可选,检查前打开的 URL
modeNo检查模式:basic(默认,完整浏览器健康检查)/ quick(低 Token 快速验证,等价于已废弃的 validation_quick_run)basic
nameNo检查名称
waitNo可选,browser_wait 参数
evidenceNo是否保存步骤证据,默认 true
noErrorsNo是否要求本轮无错误,默认 true
targetUrlNodeploy_verify 类型的目标 URL,如 http://localhost:3000
assertionsNobrowser_assert 参数
check_typeNo检查类型:standard 为标准浏览器检查(默认),deploy_verify 为部署验证(通过 HTTP 执行 API 端点/Console/CSS/静态资源检查,无需浏览器)
instrumentNo是否注入运行时探针,默认 false
clearErrorsNo检查前是否清空错误 checkpoint,默认 true
urlContainsNo快捷断言:URL 包含文本
textContainsNo快捷断言:页面包含文本
selectorVisibleNo快捷断言:元素可见
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It states basic performs a full browser health check (open URL, wait, assertions, screenshot, error count) and quick is low-token. Missing details on side effects (e.g., clearing errors, evidence saving) and whether it closes the browser session.

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?

The description is extremely concise with two dense sentences. It front-loads the tool's name and version, then efficiently explains modes and alternatives. No superfluous words.

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?

Given 14 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the core modes and one special type but omits return values, error behavior, and prerequisites. It mentions 'evidence' but doesn't clarify its impact.

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 coverage is 100%, baseline 3. The description adds value by explaining the mode enum semantics, naming the deprecated quick tool, and describing the deploy_verify type. It also clarifies the basic mode steps, which are not in the schema.

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 identifies the tool as a single validation check with distinct sub-modes (basic/quick) and a deployment verification type. It explicitly states it merges validation_quick_run, distinguishing it from that sibling.

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 explains when to use basic vs quick mode based on token cost and thoroughness, and mentions the deploy_verify alternative. However, it does not compare this tool to other validation or browser tools in the sibling list.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/validpilot/ai-verify-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server