Skip to main content
Glama

get_gaps

Identify architectural gaps by finding decisions that may not be fully implemented in your codebase.

Instructions

Find architectural gaps — decisions that were made but may not be fully implemented.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The handler for the 'get_gaps' tool which identifies decisions with constraints.
    // ── get_gaps ──
    if (name === "get_gaps") {
      const store = readStore();
    
      const gaps = store.decisions.filter(
        (d) => d.constraints.length > 0
      );
    
      if (gaps.length === 0) {
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text",
              text: "No gaps found. All decisions have been recorded without constraints.",
            },
          ],
        };
      }
    
      const report = gaps
        .map(
          (d) =>
            `⚠️  ${d.decision}\n` +
            `   Constraints: ${d.constraints.join(", ")}\n` +
            `   Recorded: ${d.timestamp.split("T")[0]}`
        )
        .join("\n\n");
    
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: "text",
            text: `Architectural Gaps Found:\n\n${report}`,
          },
        ],
      };
    }
  • src/index.ts:206-214 (registration)
    The tool registration for 'get_gaps' in the ListTools response.
    {
      name: "get_gaps",
      description:
        "Find architectural gaps — decisions that were made but may not be fully implemented.",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {},
      },
    },
Behavior2/5

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 mentions 'Find architectural gaps' but does not disclose behavioral traits such as what data sources are used, whether it's a read-only operation, potential side effects, or output format. This leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and wastes no space, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

Given the complexity of finding architectural gaps, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on how gaps are identified, what the output includes, or any behavioral context, making it insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's operation.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema fully documents the lack of inputs. The description does not add parameter details, but this is acceptable as there are no parameters to explain, maintaining clarity without redundancy.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Find') and resource ('architectural gaps'), explaining these as 'decisions that were made but may not be fully implemented.' It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_context' and 'record_decision' by focusing on gap identification rather than context retrieval or decision recording.

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?

No explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies usage for finding architectural gaps but does not specify prerequisites, exclusions, or comparisons to sibling tools, leaving the agent to infer context.

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/EliotShift/lore-mcp'

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