constitution-lint
Server Details
Static linter for CLAUDE.md-style agent constitution files: 10 operational-guardrail checks.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4.1/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.
With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion or overlap. The tool's purpose is clearly distinct.
The single tool name 'lint_constitution' follows a clear verb_noun pattern in snake_case, consistent with best practices. No inconsistency exists.
A single tool for a narrow, focused purpose (linting constitution files) is slightly below the ideal range but still appropriate. Adding complementary tools (e.g., explanation of rules) might be beneficial but not necessary.
The tool covers 10 distinct heuristic checks that comprehensively address the domain of autonomous-agent constitution linting. No obvious gaps remain for its stated purpose.
Available Tools
1 toollint_constitutionAInspect
Heuristic checker for CLAUDE.md-style autonomous-agent constitution files — 10 checks against operational-guardrail patterns (authority order, spend limit, injection defense, secrets handling, escalation, ledger discipline, self-modification guard, honest reporting, session ritual, referenced-state-files). Pattern-matching, not comprehension.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| content | Yes | The full markdown text of a CLAUDE.md-style constitution file |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the heuristic, pattern-matching nature and lists all 10 checks, providing good transparency into what the tool does and its limitations. No mention of side effects, but it is a read-only linter.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence that front-loads the purpose and efficiently lists the ten checks. Every part adds value; no extraneous words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The description covers the tool's purpose and scope but does not describe the return format or output. Given no output schema, some guidance on what the agent can expect would be helpful.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% with the single parameter well-described. The description does not add new details about the parameter format beyond what the schema provides, but it explains the context of the check. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool is a heuristic checker for CLAUDE.md-style constitution files, specifies 10 specific checks, and differentiates itself from comprehension tools. It is a specific verb+resource combination with no ambiguity.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies when to use the tool (for linting constitution files) and includes a limitation ('pattern-matching, not comprehension'), which guides expectations. However, no explicit when-not or alternatives are given, though there are no sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Related MCP Servers
- Alicense-qualityBmaintenanceAI Constraint Engine that enforces CLAUDE.md, .cursorrules, and AGENTS.md rules as laws. 51 MCP tools for semantic conflict detection, patch review, drift scoring, pre-commit hooks, and Guardian Mode. Catches euphemisms, temporal evasion, and hidden violations that keyword matching misses.Last updated12924MIT
- Alicense-qualityAmaintenanceEnforces brand writing guidelines in Claude Code by analyzing Markdown files for violations and offering on-demand readability analysis and automated term fixes through MCP tools.Last updated139MIT
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceStatic security linter for MCP servers. Scans tool definitions for vulnerabilities (path traversal, SQL injection, SSRF), scores description quality, and auto-rewrites descriptions for safer agent tool selection.Last updated210MIT
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceGovernance framework for LLM agents. Exposes seven mechanically-enforced rules plus tools for preflight file protection, audit-chain verification, session handoff and worklog templates, MCP config auditing, and an emergency kill switch.Last updated123443MIT