Skip to main content
Glama

查询调试/目标状态

get_status
Read-onlyIdempotent

Check current debug session and target state to decide if memory access is safe. Returns UVSOCK status, symbol file freshness, and serialization info.

Instructions

查询当前调试状态:是否处于调试会话、目标是否在运行、以及 UVSOCK 状态码,并额外返回 symbol_file / symbol_mtime / symbol_stale(当前符号文件路径、时间戳,以及「符号是否已与本次调试会话不一致」——编译或烧录之后旧会话的符号即过期,继续求值会报 status 13 解析错误)与 serialization(串行化方式、并发竞争遥测、是否还有别的 mdkdebug 进程在抢同一 UVSOCK)。可用于判断可否安全读写内存。注意:UVSOCK 响应的 r_status 恒为 0,真实运行状态在 data 低字节(0=停止,1=执行中),本工具已正确解析。目标运行中可查状态,但此时不可安全读内存。 【参数】无(直接调用) 【调用示例】{}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.8

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds substantial behavioral context beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations: the UVSOCK r_status is always 0 and the real state is in the data low byte, symbol staleness semantics including status 13 errors, and serialization/concurrency telemetry about competing mdkdebug processes. These are non-obvious behaviors that an agent needs to interpret results correctly.

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 longer than minimal but well-structured and front-loaded with the core purpose before diving into field-level detail. Every sentence adds useful information, including the UVSOCK quirk and memory-safety caveat, so the length is justified.

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?

For a zero-parameter tool with an output schema and strong annotations, the description covers all essential aspects: what is returned, what the returned fields mean, the notable UVSOCK parsing quirk, and when it is safe to act on the result. Nothing critical 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?

The tool has zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100%. The description explicitly confirms there are no parameters and provides a direct call example, which is sufficient; baseline 4 applies because there are no parameter semantics to elaborate.

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 identifies the verb '查询' and the resource: current debug status, including session state, target running state, and UVSOCK status. It also specifies what the tool is useful for ('判断可否安全读写内存'), but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like session_state or target_info, so it stops short of full differentiation.

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 gives clear usage context: it can be used to determine whether it is safe to read/write memory, and it warns that when the target is running, querying status is allowed but safe memory reads are not. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use this one, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

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