IA-QA — 130+ QA & Dev Tools for AI Agents

diff_mappings

Read-onlyIdempotent

Diff a baseline page mapping against a current one and return a CI-style verdict: PASS / FIX / BLOCK, plus per-element drift (ok, renamed, healable, ambiguous, lost, added, rebound). Pure and deterministic — provide two mappings as JSON with "elements" arrays of {role, name, selector, context?}. Use the companion @ia-qa/self-healing package (npm install -g @ia-qa/self-healing) to capture mappings from your app via its local MCP server ia-qa-heal-mcp, or paste the snippet from ia-qa.com/devtools/selector-drift into your browser console.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`after`	Yes	Current page mapping: same shape as before, captured after the UI change.
`before`	Yes	Baseline page mapping: { page, url, capturedAt, elements: [{role, name, selector, context?}] }. Captured before a UI change.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`rows`	No
`added`	No
`counts`	No
`verdict`	No

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive, and the description adds 'Pure and deterministic' and explains the verdict and drift outputs. No contradictions; the extra context about output categories enhances transparency.

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?

The description is three dense sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and output, followed by practical acquisition instructions. Every sentence earns its place without fluff.

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?

Given the rich output schema and annotations, the description still adds necessary context about how to capture input mappings and the deterministic nature. It's complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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% for the two required params, and the description adds meaningful detail beyond the schema by specifying the internal structure of 'elements' arrays and the optional 'context' field. This enriches understanding without redundancy.

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 clearly states the tool diffs a baseline page mapping against a current one and returns a CI-style verdict with per-element drift categories. This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling diff tools like diff_text or json_diff.

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?

The description provides clear context for when to use the tool (comparing baseline vs current page mappings) and how to obtain the required inputs via the companion package or browser snippet. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the use case is evident.

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

All IA-QA — 130+ QA & Dev Tools for AI Agents tools Inspect

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

A3.6/5.0

Disambiguation2/5

Multiple tools overlap significantly: compare_models/llm_fit_finder/model_info/list_llm_models all compare models; similarity_score/embedding_similarity/run_semantic_tests all measure text similarity; detect_secrets/secret_scan/analyze_diff_bugs/pr_gatekeeper all scan for secrets. Descriptions attempt to differentiate, but the boundaries between many tools are unclear, making selection error-prone.

Naming Consistency4/5

The vast majority of tools follow a snake_case verb_noun pattern (validate_email, generate_uuid, parse_csv), making the set mostly predictable. A few notable deviations exist (pr_gatekeeper, llm_fit_finder, cot_analyzer, jira_to_test_suite, needle_haystack_generate) but they are the exception rather than the rule.

Tool Count1/5

With 149 tools, this set is far beyond the 50+ threshold for an extreme mismatch. Even as a general-purpose QA & Dev toolkit, the sheer number overwhelms and exceeds any reasonable scope, making discovery and selection impractical.

Completeness4/5

The toolkit covers an impressively broad range: text processing, LLM evaluation, security auditing, web checks, MCP validation, Jira/Confluence integration, and more. Minor gaps exist, such as missing delete/update for webhooks and Confluence pages, and no create/update for Jira issues, but these are workable around.

Resources

Need Help?