Skip to main content
Glama
workbackai

MCP NodeJS Debugger

by workbackai

list_breakpoints

View all active breakpoints in a Node.js debugging session to monitor pause points and manage code execution flow.

Instructions

Lists all active breakpoints

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • Handler function that implements the list_breakpoints tool logic: ensures debugger enabled, lists breakpoints from inspector.breakpoints as JSON or handles no breakpoints/error cases.
    async () => {
      try {
        // Ensure debugger is enabled
        if (!inspector.debuggerEnabled) {
          await inspector.enableDebugger();
        }
        
        if (inspector.breakpoints.size === 0) {
          return {
            content: [{
              type: "text",
              text: "No active breakpoints"
            }]
          };
        }
        
        const breakpointsList = Array.from(inspector.breakpoints.values());
        
        return {
          content: [{
            type: "text",
            text: JSON.stringify(breakpointsList, null, 2)
          }]
        };
      } catch (err) {
        return {
          content: [{
            type: "text",
            text: `Error listing breakpoints: ${err.message}`
          }]
        };
      }
    }
  • Registers the 'list_breakpoints' tool with the MCP server using server.tool(), including name, description, empty input schema, and the handler function.
    server.tool(
      "list_breakpoints",
      "Lists all active breakpoints",
      {},
      async () => {
        try {
          // Ensure debugger is enabled
          if (!inspector.debuggerEnabled) {
            await inspector.enableDebugger();
          }
          
          if (inspector.breakpoints.size === 0) {
            return {
              content: [{
                type: "text",
                text: "No active breakpoints"
              }]
            };
          }
          
          const breakpointsList = Array.from(inspector.breakpoints.values());
          
          return {
            content: [{
              type: "text",
              text: JSON.stringify(breakpointsList, null, 2)
            }]
          };
        } catch (err) {
          return {
            content: [{
              type: "text",
              text: `Error listing breakpoints: ${err.message}`
            }]
          };
        }
      }
    );
  • Empty input schema for the list_breakpoints tool (no parameters required).
    {},
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. While 'Lists' implies a read-only operation, it doesn't disclose important behavioral traits like whether this requires debugger session state, what format the output takes, or if there are any limitations (e.g., only shows breakpoints for current 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 a single, efficient sentence that states exactly what the tool does with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool with no parameters.

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?

For a zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, as a debugging tool among many siblings, it lacks context about when this operation is useful versus alternatives, and the absence of annotations means behavioral details are 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?

With 0 parameters and 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 4. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters since none exist, and the schema already fully documents the empty input structure.

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 clearly states the verb ('Lists') and resource ('all active breakpoints'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'get_location' or 'inspect_variables', but the specificity of 'breakpoints' provides implicit distinction.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'set_breakpoint', 'delete_breakpoint', and 'get_location' available, there's no indication of when listing breakpoints is appropriate versus other debugging operations.

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/workbackai/mcp-nodejs-debugger'

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