Skip to main content
Glama

Carrick

by io.github.carrick-tools
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Read the findings list on main

get_findings
Read-onlyIdempotent

Read the findings list on main: type mismatches between endpoints and their callers, and groups of functions that look like copies of each other, built after each scan of main. Each row carries every place as file and line, what to check, and the call that drills into it. get_project_map shows the first rows under FOUND ON MAIN; this tool lists them all, paged.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindNoOne kind of finding: "type_mismatch" or "similar_functions". Omit for every kind.
repoNoYour repo as owner/repo (git remote) or just the repo name. Resolves which Carrick project to query.
limitNoFindings per page (default 20, max 100). A page is cut to what one response holds.
offsetNoFindings to skip (default 0). Pass the offset the previous page's last line names to continue.
statusNo"open" (default) for the findings on main now, "fixed" for the ones a later scan of main no longer found.
projectNoCarrick project slug to query. Omit to auto-resolve via `repo`, or omit both when the workspace has one project.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / kind
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "One kind of finding: \"type_mismatch\" or \"similar_functions\". Omit for every kind.",
+  "enum": [
+    "type_mismatch",
+    "similar_functions"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), so the bar is lower, and the description still adds real context: results are 'built after each scan of main', output is paged, and each row carries file/line locations plus a drill-in call. It does not spell out page-size/continuation mechanics beyond the word 'paged'.

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?

Two sentences, both dense with load-bearing content and no filler; the scope statement and the sibling comparison are front-loaded. The prose is telegraphic in places ('what to check'), which costs a little readability but no wasted sentences.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by describing row contents (every place as file and line, what to check, the drill-in call), freshness, and pagination. Combined with full schema coverage and safety annotations, an agent has what it needs; only finer paging details are absent.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all six parameters including both enums (kind, status) and pagination limits are already documented. The description only gestures at paging and adds no syntax or semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ('Read the findings list on main') and immediately enumerates the two finding kinds it returns, type mismatches between endpoints/callers and near-duplicate function groups. It also differentiates itself from the sibling get_project_map, so an agent can distinguish it without opening either schema.

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?

Explicitly routes between siblings: 'get_project_map shows the first rows under FOUND ON MAIN; this tool lists them all, paged.' That tells the agent which tool to pick and when. It stops short of stating exclusions (e.g., when a narrower tool like find_similar or get_contract_pair is preferable for a single finding).

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

All Carrick toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources