Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
EricSeokgon

egovframe-scaffold-mcp

by EricSeokgon
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

프로젝트 빌드

build_egovframe_project
Idempotent

Builds eGovFrame projects for compile, test, or package goals, auto-detects Maven/Gradle, and returns file/line build errors. Use it to validate generated projects in a generate-verify loop.

Instructions

생성한 eGovFrame 프로젝트를 실제로 빌드(컴파일·테스트·패키지)하고 결과를 구조화해 반환합니다. 빌드도구(maven/gradle)와 래퍼(mvnw/gradlew)를 자동 감지하고, 컴파일·테스트 오류를 파일·라인 단위로 파싱합니다. 원격 저장소 일시 장애(5xx·연결 끊김)는 failureKind=repository-unavailable 로 구분하고 -U 로 다시 실행합니다(retryTransient). dryRun으로 실행 예정 명령만 미리볼 수 있습니다. (생성→검증 루프 완성)

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
goalNo빌드 작업: compile(컴파일만), test(테스트까지), package(패키징, 테스트 생략). 기본 compilecompile
dryRunNotrue면 실행 없이 감지된 빌드도구·명령만 반환
projectDirYes빌드할 프로젝트 루트 디렉터리(pom.xml 또는 build.gradle 위치, 절대경로 권장)
maxLogLinesNo반환 로그의 최대 줄 수(마지막 N줄). 기본 200줄
retryTransientNo원격 저장소 일시 장애(503·연결 끊김)로 실패하면 갱신 인자(-U / --refresh-dependencies)를 붙여 다시 실행할 횟수(0–3). 컴파일·테스트 실패는 다시 실행하지 않음. 기본 1
timeoutSecondsNo빌드 타임아웃(초). 초과 시 중단. 기본 300초

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.6.0
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / retryTransient
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 1,
+  "description": "원격 저장소 일시 장애(503·연결 끊김)로 실패하면 갱신 인자(-U / --refresh-dependencies)를 붙여 다시 실행할 횟수(0–3). 컴파일·테스트 실패는 다시 실행하지 않음. 기본 1",
+  "maximum": 3,
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  2. Addedv0.36.1

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false, idempotent=true, destructive=false, openWorld=true, and the description adds substantial context beyond them: automatic maven/gradle and mvnw/gradlew detection, file/line error parsing, failureKind=repository-unavailable classification, -U re-execution for transient 5xx/disconnect failures only (not compile/test failures), and dryRun preview. Missing only what the structured result actually contains, e.g. artifact paths or the full error list shape.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action ('실제로 빌드하고 결과를 구조화해 반환') followed by the valuable behaviors. Four dense sentences with parenthetical asides that all carry content, though the packing makes it slightly heavy.

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?

For a 6-parameter build tool with no output schema and open-world network behavior, the description covers tool detection, error parsing, transient-failure handling, timeout and dryRun. What remains thin is the shape of the returned structured result and any environment prerequisites (JDK/toolchain availability).

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents goal, dryRun, retryTransient, timeoutSeconds and maxLogLines, establishing a baseline of 3. The description reinforces retryTransient's semantics (only transient repository failures trigger a refresh-argument retry) but adds little that the schema descriptions do not already state.

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 — actually builds (compiles/tests/packages) a generated eGovFrame project and returns structured results — which is more specific than the create_/validate_ siblings. However it never names or contrasts those siblings, so an agent must infer the boundary with test_egovframe_project and validate_egovframe_project.

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?

Usage is only implied via '(생성→검증 루프 완성)' and the dryRun preview, indicating it belongs after project creation. There is no explicit when-to-use vs when-not, and no statement of how it differs from the test or validate siblings.

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