Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Smart Quota Orchestrator

Smart Quota Orchestrator

by ElNeMeR70
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

sqo_edit_symbol

Edit exact functions, classes, or Class.method symbols by name using AST-level replace, insert, or delete actions, with automatic backups and syntax rollback to prevent broken code.

Instructions

Serena-Class Surgical Symbol-Level AST Mutator (v10.0): edits exact functions, classes, or Class.method symbols by name (-85% Output Tokens!) with automatic Time-Machine backup and <8ms syntax auto-rollback.

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": {
      "workspace": "<workspace>",
      "file_path": "<file_path>",
      "symbol": "<symbol>",
      "action": "<action>"
    },
    "name": "sqo_edit_symbol"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
codeNoReplacement or inserted source block.
actionYesMutation operation.
symbolYesSymbol or Class.method name to mutate.
file_pathYesTarget source file path.
workspaceYesWorkspace root directory.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv13.0.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose genuinely useful behavior: automatic Time-Machine backup plus syntax auto-rollback within 8ms. However, it never says what happens to surrounding code on a failed match, whether delete is irreversible despite the backup, what permissions or write access are required, or what the call returns, so important behavioral gaps remain.

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?

It is a single front-loaded sentence with no duplicated information, and the core operation leads. The version tag and the "(-85% Output Tokens!)" marketing fragment are dead weight that an agent gains nothing from.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a five-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the definition covers the edit target and the safety net but leaves the return value, error/resolution behavior, and per-action semantics unexplained. It is workable but not complete for a write operation.

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 five parameters including the action enum are already documented in the schema, which sets the baseline at 3. The description only reaffirms that symbols are addressed by name (including the Class.method form) and adds no format hints, matching rules, or semantics for insert_after/insert_before.

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?

States a concrete verb and resource: it edits "exact functions, classes, or Class.method symbols by name." The jargon prefix ("Serena-Class Surgical Symbol-Level AST Mutator (v10.0)") adds noise rather than clarity, and it never contrasts itself with a sibling, but the core operation is unmistakable.

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 mention of alternatives such as whole-file rewrites or other editing routes. The only implicit signal is that edits are targeted by symbol name; prerequisites such as a valid workspace root or an existing file are left unstated.

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