Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
LLMScribe

LLMScribe

by AMRITO-KUNDU
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

project_overview

Maps a local project by generating its directory tree and supported text file contents, capping output at 400,000 characters and listing omitted files.

Instructions

Directory tree plus the contents of supported text files.

Output is capped at 400,000 characters of file content; when capped, the result says so and lists the omitted files.

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": "project_overview"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathNoLocal project directory. Defaults to the server's working directory.
formatNoOutput format: 'markdown' (default) or 'json' (structured envelope).markdown

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the 400,000-character cap and that truncation is reported with omitted files listed, which is genuinely beyond the structured data. However, it never defines which files are 'supported', whether ignored/binary files are skipped, or whether recursion follows .gitignore — meaningful gaps for a tool that can pull an entire project into context.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with what the tool produces and then the size constraint. Zero filler; every clause adds information an agent would otherwise not have.

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?

The tool has no required parameters, full schema coverage, and an output schema that handles return-value shape, so the description need not explain results. Adding the truncation behavior makes it largely complete; the remaining ambiguity over what 'supported text files' includes keeps it short of full credit.

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 both parameters (path and format) are already fully documented in the schema, including the default working directory and the markdown/json enum values. The description adds no syntax or behavioral detail about parameters, so the baseline of 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 the two concrete outputs — a directory tree and the contents of supported text files — which makes clear this is a bulk project-context reader rather than a single-file read or a search. It does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings such as project_map or read, so the distinction must be inferred.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no alternative tool is named. The only implied guidance is that 'overview' means whole-project context, which is left for the agent to infer.

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