Interesting release. I especially like the probe before acting approach clear capability boundaries and deterministic checks make agent tooling much more reliable. Looking forward to seeing how WebMCP skills evolve.
WebMCP Skills v0.0.1 is live — feedback welcome
2 Comments
The hardest one for me has not been unavailable. It has been the state your list does not have a name for yet, which is ran, and the outcome is unknown.
Unavailable is comfortable because it is honest and it is final. iOS needs Xcode, the device is not authorized, the adapter says so, nothing happened, and an agent can plan around that. The bad case is a tool that returns nothing because the connection dropped after the tap was delivered, or a native input that landed in a window which lost focus partway through. The adapter has no idea whether the action took effect, and if it reports failure the agent retries, which is how you end up with two of something. Unavailable and failed want to be distinct results in the schema, because they call for opposite next moves. One says stop. The other says find out before you try again.
That is also why I would press on your probe step. Probe and act are two separate moments, and on a live page the gap between them is where the state changes underneath you. A soft navigation rebuilds the tree, a re-render swaps the node, focus moves. Probing tells you the page was controllable a moment ago. If the probe hands back something you can assert at execution time, a node identity or a revision counter you re-check inside the act call, you close most of that gap. If it hands back a boolean, the check has already expired by the time you use it.
Your point five is the one I would keep arguing for, and it matters more in agent tooling than in ordinary libraries. A capability an agent cannot discover is not a capability it has, because the model quietly routes around anything it cannot see, and you will never get a bug report about the path it did not take.
Please log in to add a comment.
Please log in to comment on this post.
More Posts
- © 2026 Coder Legion
- Feedback / Bug
- Privacy
- About Us
- Contacts
- You Tube
- Tiktok
- Premium Subscription
- Terms of Service
- Early Builders
I use AI heavily, but not lazily. For me, AI is scaffolding, acceleration, compression. It helps me move from idea to structure faster, but I still care about whether the architecture is clean, whether the pieces can survive pressure, and whether the system can still make sense after a month of changes. Speed matters. Durability matters more.
I care about structure more than appearance. If a system looks fine from the outside but hides drift, duplication, confused ownership, or fake abstractions, I do not trust it. I would rather confront the mess early than inherit it later.
I move fast, but not in the careless way people usually mean. Most of my process starts with instinct. I see a shape, a gap, or a system that feels heavier than it should be. Then I move quickly toward a first version. Not because the first version is the goal, but because reality shows up faster when something exists. Show less
More From JustineDevs
Related Jobs
- IT Service Delivery Technician IDynamics ATS · Full time · Italian Republic
- Fullstack Software Engineer, LiveOpsBRINC DRONES · Full time · Seattle, WA
- Bilingual Store Associate (Spanish)Sherwin-Williams · Full time · Hagerstown, MD
Commenters (This Week)
Contribute meaningful comments to climb the leaderboard and earn badges!