Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Designers

by com.allthepossibles
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Content hierarchy

content_hierarchy_check
Read-only

Check inverted-pyramid structure and heading usefulness. Give text (markdown-style # headings or 'h2:' prefixes), optionally keyTerms (what the reader must see early) and firstWords (default 40). Reports where each key term first appears and flags any after the first N words (if no key terms are given, the most repeated words are used and said so); lists the headings alone as the scan test; flags generic headings (Overview, Details), one-word or very long headings, skipped levels, duplicate headings, headings whose words never appear in their text, sections over 160 words, long first paragraphs and sentences, and openings that start with preamble. Position and pattern checks; it cannot judge whether the opening is the right content.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "text": "<text>"
    },
    "name": "content_hierarchy_check"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textYesThe content, with # headings
keyTermsNoTerms the reader must meet early
firstWordsNoHow many opening words count as early, 10 to 200. Default 40

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark this as a safe read-only operation, and the description adds substantial behavioral detail: fallback key-term detection, listing headings alone, specific flags, and an explicit limitation that it checks position and pattern rather than content quality.

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?

Front-loads the purpose and packs many useful details efficiently. It is dense and somewhat run-on, but every clause contributes to describing the checks and limitations.

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?

Complete for a read-only checker with no output schema. It explains inputs, reporting behavior, specific flags, and the tool's judgment boundary, so an agent knows what to expect and what not to expect.

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%, so the schema already documents the parameters. The description still adds useful meaning, especially the markdown-style # headings or 'h2:' prefix format for text and the fallback behavior when keyTerms is omitted.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: checking inverted-pyramid structure and heading usefulness. It clearly differentiates itself from general accessibility or site-outline tools by focusing on content hierarchy and heading patterns.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The context is clear enough to infer when the tool is useful, but it does not explicitly compare itself to alternatives such as site_heading_outline or check_reading_order, nor does it state when not to use it.

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

All Designers toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources