Skip to main content
Glama

Moxie Docs

by com.moxiedocs

moxie.get_documentation_opportunities

Read-onlyIdempotent

List the actionable documentation updates Moxie recommends as a prioritized queue: missing docs, drift repairs, and PR-template work. Read-only; no side effects. Returns a Markdown list, each opportunity with a title, kind (documentation_gap | documentation_drift | pr_template), severity, summary, suggested action, estimated files changed, and source paths. Use this to pick the next doc task; it is the superset of get_doc_gaps (which lists gaps only).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindNoOptional kind filter: documentation_gap, documentation_drift, or pr_template.
severityNoOptional severity filter: high, medium, low, or info.
repositoryNoThe target repository as "owner/name" (e.g. "acme/app"). Always pass this unless your token is scoped to a single repository. Matching is case-insensitive. If omitted when the token serves multiple repos, the call returns the list of repositories to choose from instead of an answer.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, and the description reinforces this with 'Read-only; no side effects.' It goes beyond annotations by describing the return format (Markdown list) and the content fields of each opportunity. This provides useful behavioral context without contradicting the annotations.

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 compact and well-structured: purpose, side-effect note, output format, and usage guidance in four sentences. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundant or filler content.

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?

Since there is no output schema, the description properly compensates by detailing the return format and item fields. Combined with schema-covered parameters and sibling comparison, the agent receives enough context to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents kind, severity, and repository well. The description adds little parameter-level meaning beyond restating the kind values and implying filtering through the output categories; the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool's purpose: listing actionable, prioritized documentation updates (missing docs, drift repairs, PR-template work). It is explicitly contrasted with get_doc_gaps as the superset, so it is easy for an agent to distinguish among siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description gives explicit usage guidance: 'Use this to pick the next doc task.' It also explains how it relates to the specific alternative get_doc_gaps ('it is the superset... which lists gaps only'), helping the agent choose between them.

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

All Moxie Docs 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

A4.5/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Tools are mostly distinct by scope and intent, but get_doc_gaps overlaps with get_documentation_opportunities as a subset, and get_ai_context partially overlaps with conventions and gaps. The descriptions explicitly clarify these relationships, so an agent can usually pick correctly.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools use a clear verb-prefixed snake_case pattern: get_, list_, propose_, review_, and search_. The naming is uniform and predictable across the entire set.

Tool Count5/5

12 tools is well within the ideal range for a documentation-assistant server. Each tool covers a distinct aspect of the workflow: discovery, context, targeted impact, proposals, and review.

Completeness5/5

The surface covers the full docs workflow: browse and search docs, retrieve conventions/gaps/opportunities, get location guidance, propose updates/removals, and review changes before commit. There are no obvious dead ends for the server's stated purpose.

Resources