Skip to main content
Glama
4DA-Systems

@4da/mcp-server

Official
by 4DA-Systems
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Pre-task briefing

what_should_i_know
Read-only

Get a pre-task briefing on dependency versions, vulnerabilities, and upgrade impacts from lockfiles before non-trivial coding tasks, especially dependency changes.

Instructions

Pre-task briefing for a task in one project: the dependencies and package families it names, installed versions, confirmed vulnerabilities, releases since, your decisions, a delegation verdict. Call BEFORE a non-trivial task, especially one that changes dependencies.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
taskYesWhat you are about to do, naming packages and versions where you know them (e.g. "upgrade fastembed from 5 to 7").
filesNoFile paths involved in the task (optional). Manifest and source paths help find the packages involved.
project_pathNoProject directory the task is about; its lockfiles decide which packages exist. Default: the project the server was started in.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv6.0.2
    • addedInput schema / properties / project_path
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Project directory the task is about; its lockfiles decide which packages exist. Default: the project the server was started in.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observedv6.0.1

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true), and the description adds what the agent actually receives — a bundled brief with installed versions, confirmed vulnerabilities, releases since, prior decisions, and a delegation verdict. Since there is no output schema, this enumeration of return contents is valuable behavioral disclosure beyond the annotations.

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?

The output contents are front-loaded in the first sentence and the usage call-to-action follows immediately. It is dense but every clause maps to a real behavior; only the long comma list slightly pressures readability.

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?

For a read-only aggregator with no output schema, the description supplies what the agent needs: the bundled content, the ideal invocation timing, and the fact that lockfiles/project context determine scope. Nothing critical for correct invocation 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 description coverage is 100%, so all three parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds only a light hint about the task content ('the dependencies and package families it names'), which is essentially restating what the schema already says. Baseline 3 applies.

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 concrete deliverable (a pre-task briefing) and enumerates its contents — dependencies, installed versions, vulnerabilities, releases since, decisions, a delegation verdict. This clearly separates it from single-purpose siblings like vulnerability_scan or dependency_health, though it never names a sibling explicitly.

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?

It gives a clear trigger: 'Call BEFORE a non-trivial task, especially one that changes dependencies.' That is actionable timing guidance. However, with 11 siblings there is no when-not guidance and no named alternatives (e.g., call vulnerability_scan instead when you only need CVEs).

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools