Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Clairvoyance

by fyi.clairvoyance
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Red Flags Diagnostic

red-flags
Read-only

Scans code against 17 design smells (the book's 14 named Red Flags plus 3 process-stage signals) and produces a structured diagnostic report. Use when the user asks for a red flags or design smell scan, asks to check code against a checklist, is evaluating unfamiliar code, or asks open-endedly whether anything is off in a named or pasted file, class, or function, or asks you to look it over. Not for a specific bug, error, or failing test the user has already identified. Not for a plain diff or PR review before merge, or whether a PR maintains design trajectory (use code-evolution for both), or diagnosing why code feels complex (use complexity-recognition).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "red-flags"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description carries most of the behavioral burden and does add value: it discloses scan scope (17 smells, 14 named plus 3 process-stage signals) and that output is a structured diagnostic report. It does not describe report structure or any execution constraints, and no output schema exists to cover that gap.

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?

Front-loaded purpose sentence followed by tightly packed when-to-use and when-not clauses, each mapping to a specific sibling. Long but every clause earns its place by disambiguating against the 18-tool family.

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 zero-parameter, read-only diagnostic with no output schema, the description supplies everything needed: what it scans, what it returns, when to invoke it, and which siblings handle the excluded cases.

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?

No parameters are defined, so there is no parameter semantics to document; baseline for a zero-parameter tool is 4. The description correctly implies the target is supplied conversationally (named or pasted file/class/function) rather than via arguments.

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 ('scans code against 17 design smells ... produces a structured diagnostic report') and enumerates the smell inventory. It explicitly distinguishes itself from siblings like code-evolution and complexity-recognition, so an agent can route without opening any schema.

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?

Explicit when-to-use triggers (red flags/design smell scan, checklist check, unfamiliar code, open-ended 'is anything off') and explicit when-not cases (already-identified bug/error/failing test; plain diff or PR review). It names the alternative tools for the excluded cases, leaving nothing to inference.

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

All Clairvoyance 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