Skip to main content
Glama

SHPBL: Repository Audit & Repair

by com.shpbl

What SHPBL publishes

library_index
Read-onlyIdempotent

Everything published on shpbl.com in one read: the editions and their prices and licences, the seven volumes of The Strategic Master Library with their seals and read links, the public downloads with byte sizes, and the case studies of real audit runs with each verdict. Scope it with sections, or pass volume (slug or 1-7) or case_study (slug) for one record in full. Free — no key, no allowance.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
volumeNoOne volume in full, by slug or by number 1-7. Its complete text is a `library_document` call.
sectionsNoWhich sections to return. Omit for all of them: facts, volumes, editions, downloads, case_studies.
case_studyNoOne case study in full, by slug — what the run got right and what it learned.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only and idempotent behavior; the description adds that the call returns everything in one read unless scoped, and that it is free with no key or allowance. This is meaningful operational context beyond the structured annotations. No contradiction with 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?

Three short sentences handle purpose, usage, and access with no filler. The first sentence front-loads the resource and scope, the second explains filtering, and the third closes with authorization requirements.

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 read-only index with no output schema, the description covers return content categories, filtering modes, and auth requirements. The full-text routing to library_document appears in the schema's volume parameter, rounding out the agent-facing picture.

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 schema covers all three parameters at 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds output-level semantics tied to sections—prices and licences, seals and read links, byte sizes, and verdicts—which enriches what each section will contain without repeating 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 names a specific action ('in one read') and a concrete resource ('everything published on shpbl.com'), then enumerates the exact content categories. The 'one read' framing clearly distinguishes it from the full-text/search siblings, even without naming them.

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?

It clearly explains how to scope the tool via sections, volume, or case_study, which implies the main use cases. However, it does not explicitly say when to prefer library_search or library_document, so alternative selection is left mostly to inference.

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

All SHPBL: Repository Audit & Repair 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

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools target distinct stages or resource types: evaluate/fix/harvest are clearly separate audit phases, and write_to_repo/list_repos are unambiguous. The library_* trio is mostly separable but library_document and library_index both offer access to volumes, and run_gauntlet partially overlaps the individual stage tools, so a couple of boundaries are less crisp.

Naming Consistency4/5

Names are uniformly lowercase snake_case and mostly follow a verb_noun pattern: evaluate_repo, fix_repo, harvest_repo, write_to_repo, list_repos, run_gauntlet. A few are noun_noun or resource-prefixed like library_search, library_document, subscription_status, and welcome/selfcheck_mcp are one-offs, so it is predictable but not perfectly uniform.

Tool Count5/5

At 14 tools the server sits within the ideal 3-15 range, and each tool has a plausible role in the audit/repair, library, or operational workflow. The count is on the larger side but justified by separate free and Practitioner lanes, library services, and health/status checks.

Completeness4/5

The core audit lifecycle is well covered: list/scope, evaluate, fix, harvest, write back, plus library search and run orchestration. The main gap is that build_intent explicitly gates COMPOSE/SPECIALIZE/CREATE operations, but no actual compose/specialize/create tools are exposed, and there is no explicit run_gauntlet cancellation or reset, though agents can work around both.

Resources