Skip to main content
Glama

triage_test_coverage

Audit a set of files or directories and return a weakest-first ranked leaderboard of mutation scores to identify where the test suite is most fragile in one call.

Instructions

Batch triage: audit a set of files and/or directories and return a weakest-first ranked leaderboard of mutation scores, so you can see where the test suite is most fragile in one call. Directories are recursively expanded to supported source files (.ts/.js/.py/.rs/.php), skipping test files. Files are audited serially. Drill into a weak file with audit_code_resilience for per-mutant survivor detail.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathsNoWorkspace-relative files and/or directories to triage. Directories are recursively expanded to supported source files. Example: ["src/utils", "src/index.ts"]
diffBaseNoAuto-scope the triage to files changed in git. "HEAD" (uncommitted), "staged", or any ref/branch/SHA (merge-base with HEAD). Makes "paths" optional: diffBase alone scans all changed supported source files; diffBase + paths intersects with those paths. TypeScript files are mutated only on changed lines; other languages run whole-file. Example: "main"
maxFilesNoCap on the number of files audited (precedence: this arg > config.defaultMaxFiles > 25). Files beyond the cap are skipped (reported in the summary). Example: 25
minScoreNoGate: if any file's mutation score is below this (0–100), the result reports gate.passed=false and lists the failing files. Never causes an error. Example: 80.
timeoutMsNoPer-file mutation-run timeout in milliseconds. Default: 300000 (5 minutes).
outputFormatNoOutput format. "json" (default) or "text".
fileConcurrencyNoHow many files to audit in parallel. Default min(4, cpus-1). When >1, each StrykerJS run's worker count is capped so total CPU use stays near the core count. Example: 4
mutatorDenylistNoStryker mutator names to exclude, applied to every TypeScript/JS file.
survivorsPerFileNoHow many top (severity-ranked, enriched) survivor groups to inline per ranked file. 0 (default) returns a scores-only leaderboard. Example: 3

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
gateNo
modeYes
noteYes
errorsYes
rankingYes
summaryYes
scopeNoteNo
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: directories are recursively expanded, test files are skipped, files are audited serially, diffBase auto-scoping behavior, maxFiles cap precedence, minScore gate behavior, and parallel execution limits via fileConcurrency. This gives a clear picture of what the tool does and its constraints.

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 somewhat lengthy but well-structured. It starts with a concise summary of the tool's purpose and then provides organized details. Every sentence adds necessary information about behavior, parameters, or sibling distinctions. No filler or redundancy.

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 the tool's complexity (9 parameters, no required, 100% schema coverage, and output schema exists), the description is complete. It covers input scope, processing behavior, output format, and integration with other tools. The existence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values in detail.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds significant value beyond the schema by explaining nuanced behaviors: diffBase alone vs combined with paths, maxFiles precedence, survivorsPerFile default behavior (0 returns scores-only), and concurrency/CPU awareness. This extra context improves parameter understanding.

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 performs batch triage of files/directories, returning a weakest-first ranked leaderboard of mutation scores. It explicitly mentions the goal: to see where the test suite is most fragile. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool audit_code_resilience by noting that drill-down is possible with that tool.

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?

The description provides clear guidance on when to use this tool: for a quick overview of mutation score fragility across multiple files. It explicitly directs users to use audit_code_resilience for detailed per-mutant survivor analysis. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool, but the sibling differentiation is strong.

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/AraneaDev/Chaos-MCP'

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