Skip to main content
Glama

Check a consumer against a producer

check_compatibility
Read-onlyIdempotent

Check a consumer service's calls against a producer's operations: missing or unused operations, plus stored type verdicts (coverage in type_verdicts). Read status first. It reads compatible, incompatible, partially_checked, or unresolved where nothing was compared, and pairs_compared and pairs_uncompared say how much of the pair the check reached. Call it before removing or changing any route, shape, field, or event. Consumers that reach the producer through a published SDK package have no call site of their own and are listed separately in via_sdk, never merged into the direct pairs. For whole-project topology, use get_service_graph first. To read both sides' types for the operations a verdict names, use get_contract_pair. Reference: https://docs.carrick.tools/mcp-tools

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": {
      "consumer_service": "<consumer_service>",
      "producer_service": "<producer_service>"
    },
    "name": "check_compatibility"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathNoFilter by HTTP path, GraphQL field, or socket event name. A `{field=value}` dispatch suffix narrows to one case. On a large pair this is what narrows the answer; paging alone cannot.
repoNoYour repo as owner/repo (git remote) or just the repo name. Resolves which Carrick project to query.
limitNoIssue rows per page (default 50, max 200). Errors come first; issue_counts counts every category. A page is cut further when the response would be too long to read inline.
methodNoFilter by operation label: HTTP method (GET, POST), GraphQL kind (QUERY, MUTATION), or socket direction (CLIENT->SERVER, SERVER->CLIENT, UNKNOWN). UNKNOWN also selects HTTP routes whose verb the scan could not read; each row names its protocol.
offsetNoIssue rows to skip (default 0). Pass the `next_offset` from a previous call to page through.
projectNoCarrick project slug to query. Omit to auto-resolve via `repo`, or omit both when the workspace has one project.
consumer_serviceYesThe service making API calls
producer_serviceYesThe service exposing endpoints

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds return semantics beyond the read-only annotations: status values (compatible, incompatible, partially_checked, unresolved), coverage via pairs_compared/uncompared, and separate via_sdk handling. Those details are important for interpreting results and are not in the schema or annotations.

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 dense but appropriately sized for an 8-parameter tool with non-obvious status semantics. It front-loads the core purpose and keeps every sentence directed at selection or interpretation.

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?

With no output schema, the description supplies the return-status vocabulary and coverage fields an agent needs to interpret results. Combined with full schema coverage for inputs and annotations for safety, nothing essential is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so parameters are fully documented in the input schema; the description does not add parameter-level detail beyond schema descriptions. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 precise verb and resources ('Check a consumer service's calls against a producer's operations') and enumerates the findings. It explicitly distinguishes the tool from get_service_graph and get_contract_pair, so an agent can select it without opening siblings.

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?

It gives explicit timing ('Call it before removing or changing any route, shape, field, or event') and names alternatives for related jobs ('For whole-project topology, use get_service_graph first'; 'To read both sides' types... use get_contract_pair'). It also instructs to read status first, covering when to use it and when to use others.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.