Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Carrick

by io.github.carrick-tools
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Show the project map

get_project_map
Read-onlyIdempotent

Call this first in a session: a compact plain-text map of the project, naming the sibling services this project indexes, the contracts this repo depends on, who consumes this repo, and the unmatched calls with how many of them match no route, with the drill-down tool at the end of every section. Cheap; pass service to split THIS REPO from its siblings, detail for more rows per section.

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": "get_project_map"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
repoNoYour repo as owner/repo (git remote) or just the repo name. Resolves which Carrick project to query.
detailNoRaise the per-section row caps roughly fivefold. Use it when the default map collapsed a section you need to read.
projectNoCarrick project slug to query. Omit to auto-resolve via `repo`, or omit both when the workspace has one project.
serviceNoYour repo or service, so the map splits THIS REPO from the siblings you do not have checked out (fuzzy match by service name, repo name, or trailing segment). Omit on a single-service project; omit on a multi-service one to render the whole project.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

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

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real context beyond that: the output is cheap, compact, and plain-text, it is sectioned with per-section row caps that `detail` raises roughly fivefold, and each section links onward to a drill-down tool. Those are traits the annotations cannot convey.

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?

Front-loaded with the imperative and the timing cue, and both sentences carry information that changes agent behavior. The first sentence is an overloaded run-on that lists four sections in one breath, which costs some readability but not correctness.

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 carries the burden of describing return value and does so by enumerating the sections and their payloads, plus noting the format is plain text and each section ends with a drill-down link. Adequate for a zero-required-parameter orientation tool; only the per-section sibling names are left implicit.

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 the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the two most decision-relevant parameters — `service` (splits this repo from siblings) and `detail` (more rows per section, with the cue that a section collapsed) — but says nothing about `repo` or `project`, which the schema already handles adequately.

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 concrete resource (a compact plain-text map of the project) and enumerates its four sections: sibling services indexed, contracts depended on, consumers, and unmatched calls with route-match counts. The opening "Call this first in a session" positions it against every sibling tool that drills into one of those sections, so an agent can identify it without opening a 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 states the entry-point ordering ("call this first in a session") and gives the two conditional modifiers: `service` to split THIS REPO from siblings, `detail` for more rows. What's missing is a direct pointer to the alternative — it says every section ends with "the drill-down tool" but never names which sibling (get_service_graph, get_callers, list_external_calls, …) follows which section.

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
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