Skip to main content
Glama

SHPBL: Repository Audit & Repair

by com.shpbl

Search the capability library

library_search
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search the Collective Master Library for a capability in plain words, before writing new code. scope: "catalog" (Practitioner) searches the engineered components — class, what each does, API surface, line counts, verification marks. scope: "vault" searches the discovery-engine index of build-checked syntheses. scope: "composites" searches capabilities earlier runs invented for one host by fusing library parts, each citing its sealed report. Pass ids for whole rows by component ID, with siblings and declared twins. Multi-word queries match term by term and rank; with no exact hit you get the closest rows, labelled as such.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idsNoUp to 20 component IDs (e.g. `STIER-S-84`, `BLD-ENG-303`) returned in full instead of a search.
keyNoYour SHPBL subscription key (shpbl_mcp_…). Optional if your client sends it as the `Authorization: Bearer …` request header.
packNoVault only: restrict to one vertical pack, e.g. `fintech-v1`. Substring match.
pageNo1-based page of results. A page past the end is refused, never returned empty.
limitNoAlias for `page_size`, 1 to 50. Given both, `page_size` wins.
queryNoPlain-words capability, name, ID or API symbol. Omit to page the whole pool.
scopeNo`catalog` — engineered components (Practitioner). `vault` — discovery-engine pipelines. `crown-jewels` — the S-Tier Vault of standalone lab-curated artifacts. `composites` — capabilities past runs invented for one host.catalog
page_sizeNoRows per page, 1 to 50.
certified_onlyNoCrown jewels only: return only rows whose body the certification harness executed and read clean (CERTIFIED or PROVISIONAL). This withholds the INCONCLUSIVE rows — bodies the harness could not exercise, which still exist and still ship. Leave this off (the default) to see them too; the withheld figure is reported as `certification.withheldInconclusive`.
component_classNoCatalog only: restrict to one component class, e.g. `CrownJewel/S-Tier`, `Block/Engine`. Substring match.
include_siblingsNoWith `ids`: also list up to 12 other component IDs in the same class, for comparison.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark the call read-only, idempotent and open-world; the description adds matching behavior ('multi-word queries match term by term and rank'), fallback behavior ('with no exact hit you get the closest rows, labelled as such'), and id expansion ('siblings and declared twins'). This goes beyond the annotation hints.

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?

The description is dense but every sentence earns its place, front-loading the core purpose and then detailing scope-specific behavior. The use of inline code and examples keeps it compact for the breadth it covers.

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?

For an 11-parameter search tool with no output schema, the description covers the main behavioral branches (scopes, ids, fuzzy fallback, certification caveats in the schema) and leaves pagination/auth to the parameter descriptions. It omits return format and ranking details, but they are less critical for invocation.

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 baseline is met; the description substantially enriches it by explaining what each scope returns, what ids returns versus query, and how multi-word queries behave. It doesn't enumerate every parameter, but the schema already does that.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource — 'Search the Collective Master Library for a capability in plain words' — and distinguishes the search action from sibling tools by defining three scopes (catalog, vault, composites) and the ids path. This makes the tool's purpose unmistakable.

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?

It explicitly frames when to use it: 'before writing new code', and describes what each scope is for (Practitioner catalog, discovery-engine vault, invented composites). It does not name alternatives or exclusion conditions, so guidance is contextual rather than comparative.

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