Skip to main content
Glama

get_checklist

Generate a pre-commit checklist for shell type A, B, or C to verify all requirements before marking a page as complete.

Instructions

Returns the pre-commit checklist for a shell type. Run this before declaring a page done.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
shellYes

Implementation Reference

  • The tool handler for 'get_checklist'. Accepts a shell type ('A', 'B', or 'C') and returns the corresponding pre-commit checklist from the CHECKLIST static object.
    server.tool("get_checklist", "Pre-commit checklist for a shell type.", { shell: z.enum(["A","B","C"]) }, async ({ shell }) => {
      return { content: [{ type: "text" as const, text: CHECKLIST[shell] || `No checklist for ${shell}` }] };
    });
  • Input schema: shell must be one of 'A', 'B', or 'C' (validated via Zod enum).
    server.tool("get_checklist", "Pre-commit checklist for a shell type.", { shell: z.enum(["A","B","C"]) }, async ({ shell }) => {
  • api/mcp.ts:599-601 (registration)
    Registration of the 'get_checklist' tool via server.tool() in the MCP handler.
    server.tool("get_checklist", "Pre-commit checklist for a shell type.", { shell: z.enum(["A","B","C"]) }, async ({ shell }) => {
      return { content: [{ type: "text" as const, text: CHECKLIST[shell] || `No checklist for ${shell}` }] };
    });
  • Static CHECKLIST data object containing pre-commit checklist strings for shells A, B, and C.
    const CHECKLIST: Record<string, string> = {
      C: "# Pre-Commit Checklist — Shell C (Reports)\n\n## STRUCTURE\n[ ] .classic-tab has exactly ONE direct child .classic-tab__body\n[ ] .table-scroll-area is a SIBLING of .classic-tab\n[ ] Every .drawer paired with .drawer-backdrop\n[ ] .reports-quicklink is direct child of .app-shell\n\n## CSS LINKS\n[ ] tokens, layout, topnavbar, line-tab, classic-tab, rpt-chart-floater, drawer, form-input, form-dropdown linked\n\n## VARIANTS\n[ ] Reports actionbar = Type 8\n[ ] Header = Variant 3\n[ ] Reports quicklink uses .line-tab--quicklink",
      A: "# Pre-Commit Checklist — Shell A (Dashboard)\n\n## STRUCTURE\n[ ] Only .dash scrolls\n[ ] stat-row: max 4 stat cards\n[ ] tile-grid: max 3 tiles\n[ ] Hybrid widgets: max 3 per dash__row",
      B: "# Pre-Commit Checklist — Shell B (Settings)\n\n## STRUCTURE\n[ ] sidemenu_variant1 used\n[ ] ActionBar type 1-7 ONLY\n[ ] classic-tab has __body with __content panels",
    };
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states a return but does not indicate whether the tool has side effects, requires authentication, or what happens with different shell values.

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 description is very concise with two sentences, no redundant words. It front-loads the main purpose. However, it could be slightly expanded to cover parameter details without sacrificing conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description should still clarify the parameter meaning and expected output format. The current text leaves ambiguity about what 'pre-commit checklist' contains and how shell types map.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description only vaguely refers to 'shell type' without explaining the parameter's meaning, enum values, or how to use it. The description adds minimal value beyond 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 uses a specific verb 'returns' and clearly identifies the resource as 'pre-commit checklist for a shell type'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on a checklist task, though it could be more precise about what 'shell type' means.

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 provides a clear usage context: 'Run this before declaring a page done.' However, it lacks any guidance on when not to use this tool or mention of alternative tools.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Anguraj-zoho/elegant-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server