Skip to main content
Glama

vibedeploy

by be.vibedeploy

Multi-file find/replace in one call

apply_edits
Destructive

Apply find/replace edits across MANY files in one tool call. Batch sibling of update_file_content. Per-file edit semantics identical (count: 1 default, -1 = all, positive int asserts exact count). Whole call is atomic across files: validation runs first, writes only proceed if every edit's count check passes.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
filesYesFiles + edits to apply. Up to 25 files / 200 total edits per call. All-or-nothing: if any edit's match count differs from its expected count, NOTHING is written.
targetNoTree to edit, dist (default) or source. Same tree applies to every file in this call.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
filesYes
siteIdYes
targetYes
request_idNoServer-assigned request correlation id. Quote it when contacting support.
totalEditsYes

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond annotations (destructive hint), the description adds that edits are atomic, validation runs first, writes only proceed if all count checks pass, and count semantics, providing valuable behavioral context.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no wasted words, and well-structured for quick comprehension.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (batch, atomic, count logic), the description covers validation, atomicity, and sibling reference. An output schema exists, so return values are handled.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is high (67%), and the description reinforces batch semantics and constraints (max 25 files/200 edits) but adds limited new parameter-specific meaning beyond 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 states 'Apply find/replace edits across MANY files in one tool call' and identifies it as the batch sibling of update_file_content, distinguishing it from the single-file tool.

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 this tool (batch edits) and provides details on validation and atomic behavior, though it could explicitly state to use update_file_content for single-file edits.

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

All vibedeploy toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Every tool has a clearly distinct purpose, from deployment and file management to domain configuration and analytics. Even similar-sounding tools like add_files and add_file_chunk are well-differentiated by context and use case.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using snake_case (e.g., add_custom_domain, list_sites, delete_source_file). The naming is predictable and easy to understand.

Tool Count4/5

39 tools is higher than the typical 3-15 range, but each tool serves a necessary function for a comprehensive deployment platform. The count is justified by the broad feature set, though slightly heavy.

Completeness5/5

The tool set covers the full lifecycle of site deployment, management, backup, custom domains, form handling, analytics, and source editing. There are no obvious gaps for the intended functionality.

Resources