Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

The Deployer

by com.thedploy
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Check a live server

diagnose
Read-onlyIdempotent

Read-only checks on a live project: url (requests the project's live addresses from The Deployer's side), containers (what runs and its state), app_logs (the app's own recent output, secrets removed), resources (load, memory, disk) or web_server (the HTTPS proxy's log). Fixed commands only; changes nothing. All but url need a server (not managed services). Needs Deploy access on the project.

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": {
      "project": "<project>"
    },
    "name": "diagnose"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nodeNoThe server, default app-1
checkNo
linesNo
projectYesThe project's id, name or repository (owner/name).
containerNoFor app_logs: one container's name
workspaceNoA teammate's workspace id. Default: your own.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / container / description
      Previous value: -"app_logs only: one container name from containers"New value: +"For app_logs: one container's name"
    • changedInput schema / properties / workspace / description
      Previous value: -"Act in a teammate's workspace: its id from account. Default: your own."New value: +"A teammate's workspace id. Default: your own."
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds genuinely new behavioral facts: fixed commands only, app_logs output has secrets stripped, url is the only check that works without a server, and an access requirement. It stops short of describing output volume or failure modes, but that is minor given the annotation coverage.

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?

One dense sentence with the purpose front-loaded and each clause carrying information; nothing is padding. It is slightly run-on with nested parentheses, which costs a little readability, but the information density justifies the length.

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 a 6-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers scope, preconditions, and per-check semantics well enough to invoke correctly. The remaining gap is the `lines` parameter and the default behavior when `check` is omitted, neither of which is documented anywhere.

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's `check` parameter has no per-value descriptions, so the description carries real weight by explaining what each of the five enum values actually returns. It also implies the server/node dependency for four of the five checks. It adds nothing about `lines` (still undocumented anywhere) or what happens if `check` 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+resource ("Read-only checks on a live project") and then enumerates all five check types with a short gloss of each, so an agent knows exactly what it can retrieve. It is clearly separable from siblings like logs, status, or deployment because it scopes itself to fixed diagnostic commands against a live server.

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?

Gives concrete preconditions — needs a server, not managed services, and requires Deploy access on the project — which tells the agent when the tool will fail. It does not, however, name alternatives (e.g., logs or status) or say when to prefer those over diagnose, so routing between overlapping siblings is left to inference.

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

All The Deployer 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