Skip to main content
Glama

Pathrule

by io.pathrule

Go To Node

pathrule_goto
Read-only

Resolve a path/name/fuzzy target inside a workspace and return full content for that node plus a compact subtree memory index.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
targetYesNode path, name, or fuzzy target such as '/apps/api' or 'auth'.
workspace_idYesWorkspace UUID from pathrule_list_workspaces.
subtree_limitNoMaximum entries in the subtree memory index. Defaults to 50, capped at 500. Raise it only when the compact index is genuinely truncated.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYestrue when the call succeeded. false when it did not, in which case `error` carries the reason and the success fields are absent.
nodeNoThe node the target resolved to.
errorNoPresent only when ok is false.
rulesNoActive rules on the node, with full content. Obey these.
skillsNoActive skills on the node, with full content.
memoriesNoActive memories on the node, with full content: id, title, content, source.
subtree_memory_indexNoCompact index of memories below the node: { entries, total, truncated }.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / subtree_limit / description
      Added value: +"Maximum entries in the subtree memory index. Defaults to 50, capped at 500. Raise it only when the compact index is genuinely truncated."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "error": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "description": "Present only when ok is false.",
+      "properties": {
+        "code": {
+          "description": "Stable machine-readable failure code, for example insufficient_scope, workspace_id_required, rate_limited, not_found, or upstream_error. Branch on this, not on message text.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "detail": {
+          "description": "Optional structured context for the failure, for example { missing_scopes: [...] } on insufficient_scope."
+        },
+        "message": {
+          "description": "Human-readable explanation of the failure.",
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "code",
+        "message"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "memories": {
+      "description": "Active memories on the node, with full content: id, title, content, source.",
+      "items": {},
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "node": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "description": "The node the target resolved to.",
+      "properties": {
+        "name": {
+          "description": "Node display name.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "node_id": {
+          "description": "Tree node UUID for the resolved target.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "path": {
+          "description": "Workspace-relative path of the node.",
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "node_id",
+        "path",
+        "name"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "ok": {
+      "description": "true when the call succeeded. false when it did not, in which case `error` carries the reason and the success fields are absent.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "rules": {
+      "description": "Active rules on the node, with full content. Obey these.",
+      "items": {},
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "skills": {
+      "description": "Active skills on the node, with full content.",
+      "items": {},
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "subtree_memory_index": {
+      "description": "Compact index of memories below the node: { entries, total, truncated }."
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "ok"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description need not restate safety. It does add useful context about returning a subtree memory index in addition to node content, but it does not disclose anything about edge-case behavior, resolution failure, or workspace constraints beyond what the schema and annotations imply.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the action and resource, with the return payload summarized compactly. It is efficient and readable, though slightly dense with the compound noun phrase 'compact subtree memory index'.

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?

Given that an output schema exists, the return structure needs no further description. The description covers the core behavior and result format, and the annotations cover the safety profile. The only notable gap is explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over its siblings, which is minor relative to the tool's simple read-only nature.

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%, and each parameter (target, workspace_id, subtree_limit) is already documented with clear descriptions and constraints. The description adds no meaningful parameter semantics beyond restating the fuzzy-target concept already present in the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a specific verb ('Resolve') and resource ('path/name/fuzzy target inside a workspace') and specifies the two-part result: full content plus a compact subtree memory index. It is clear about what the tool does, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like pathrule_get_node or pathrule_get_tree.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for fuzzy or path-based navigation inside a workspace, which differentiates it from more specific node/tree readers, but it provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. Alternatives are not named, so an agent must infer the right context from the description alone.

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

All Pathrule toolsInspect
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

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Tools are grouped by resource (memory/rule/skill/workspace/snapshot/refresh) and mostly have distinct output shapes, so agents can usually pick the right one. A few retrieval tools (get_context, get_node, get_tree, goto) overlap in purpose, but their descriptions clarify resolution mode vs full tree vs context bundle.

Naming Consistency3/5

All tools share the pathrule_ prefix and mostly follow verb_noun, but the verbs are inconsistent: create_workspace vs write_memory, get_node vs read_memory, delete_skill vs remove_pattern, plus verb-only exceptions like goto, setup, and ping. The pattern is readable but not uniform.

Tool Count2/5

32 tools is above the 25-tool threshold and feels heavy for a single server, even with a broad domain. Several context-retrieval tools and read/list variants could potentially be consolidated, though each tool does have a specific purpose.

Completeness4/5

Core CRUD is covered for memories, rules, and skills, along with workspaces, snapshots, refresh tasks, and pattern import/removal. Minor gaps include no standalone list_rules/list_skills and no snapshot update/delete, but agents can work around these via get_context, goto, and get_tree.

Resources