Skip to main content
Glama

docs_validate

Validate documentation structure and completeness to ensure technical accuracy and consistency in project documentation.

Instructions

Validate documentation structure and completeness

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • Core implementation of the docs_validate tool: validates presence of required docs directories (docs/, MASTER_DOCS/), specific master MD files, and CLAUDE.md.
    async validateDocumentationStructure(): Promise<{ valid: boolean; issues: string[] }> {
      const issues: string[] = [];
      
      // Check for required directories
      const requiredDirs = [this.docsRoot, this.masterDocs];
      for (const dir of requiredDirs) {
        if (!this.fs.existsSync(dir)) {
          issues.push(`Missing required directory: ${this.path.relative(this.projectRoot, dir)}`);
        }
      }
    
      // Check for master documentation files
      const requiredMasterDocs = [
        'README.md',
        '01-ARCHITECTURE-OVERVIEW.md',
        '03-QUICK-START-GUIDE.md',
        '04-API-REFERENCE.md'
      ];
    
      for (const doc of requiredMasterDocs) {
        const docPath = this.path.join(this.masterDocs, doc);
        if (!this.fs.existsSync(docPath)) {
          issues.push(`Missing master documentation: ${doc}`);
        }
      }
    
      // Check CLAUDE.md
      if (!this.fs.existsSync(this.claudeMd)) {
        issues.push('Missing CLAUDE.md in project root');
      }
    
      return {
        valid: issues.length === 0,
        issues
      };
    }
  • MCP tool schema definition for docs_validate, no input parameters required.
    {
      name: 'docs_validate',
      description: 'Validate documentation structure and completeness',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {},
        required: []
      }
    }
  • Tool registration: registers the docs_validate handler as a thin wrapper around DocumentationService.validateDocumentationStructure().
    tools.set('docs_validate', async () => {
      return await documentationService.validateDocumentationStructure();
    });
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions validation but doesn't describe what the tool does operationally (e.g., checks syntax, verifies links, outputs a report), whether it's read-only or has side effects, or any performance or error-handling traits. This leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior.

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 phrase ('Validate documentation structure and completeness') with no wasted words. It's front-loaded and appropriately sized for its purpose, 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 implied by validation tasks, lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'validate' entails, what the output might be (e.g., a report, status), or how it fits with siblings, leaving the agent under-informed for effective use.

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 absence of inputs. The description doesn't need to add parameter details, and it doesn't contradict the schema. A baseline of 4 is appropriate for a parameterless tool with complete schema coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Validate documentation structure and completeness' states a general purpose (validation) but lacks specificity about what resource it validates (e.g., which documentation) and how it differs from siblings like 'analyze_document_quality' or 'generate_documentation_report'. It's vague about scope and method.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'analyze_document_quality' or 'generate_documentation_report'. The description implies validation but doesn't specify context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without direction.

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/Ghostseller/CastPlan_mcp'

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