Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ts-mcp-server

ts-mcp-server

by AndyLiner13
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Extract Type

extractType
Destructive

Extract inline type annotations into named type aliases for reuse. Select the type span, then rename the new type as needed.

Instructions

Extract an inline type annotation into a named type alias. Select the type span to extract. The response includes renameFilename/renameLocation so you can follow up with rename_symbol to give the type a meaningful name.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "file": "<file>",
      "startLine": "<startLine>",
      "startOffset": "<startOffset>",
      "endLine": "<endLine>",
      "endOffset": "<endOffset>",
      "preview": "<preview>"
    },
    "name": "extractType"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fileYesFile path (absolute or relative to cwd)
endLineYes1-based end line
previewYesIf true, only preview changes
endOffsetYes1-based end character offset
startLineYes1-based start line
startOffsetYes1-based start character offset

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.1

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true, and the description adds that the response includes renameFilename/renameLocation, explaining the output behavior beyond the annotation.

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 concise sentences that efficiently convey purpose, usage, and follow-up steps with no superfluous information.

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 description covers the core functionality and response content, and the annotation fills in the destructive nature. It is sufficiently complete for a tool with six required parameters.

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 baseline is 3. The description mentions selecting the type span but does not add significant extra meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions.

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?

The description clearly states the tool extracts an inline type annotation into a named type alias, distinguishing it from sibling tools like extractConstant or extractFunction.

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 tells when to use ('Select the type span to extract') and suggests a follow-up action with rename_symbol, providing clear usage context without explicit exclusions.

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