Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
patchbay

patchbay

by GodSmasher
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Scan a repo for integration opportunities

scan_repo

Scan a local or GitHub repository for integration opportunities patchbay can build, such as stub webhook handlers, unused vendor SDKs, and TODO notes, returning a ranked list with ready-to-run prompts.

Instructions

Walk a repository (local directory or shallow-cloned GitHub URL) and report the integration opportunities patchbay could build: webhook handlers with TODO/empty bodies, .env.example entries pointing at vendor APIs with no implementation, TODO/FIXME comments mentioning vendors, and vendor SDKs imported but barely used. Understands TypeScript/JavaScript (Express/Next/Fastify routes) AND Python (FastAPI/Flask routes, pass bodies, raise NotImplementedError). Returns a ranked list, each item with a ready-to-run prompt the agent can hand straight to build_connector. Instant, free (no LLM / sandbox), auditable regex-only output.

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": {
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "scan_repo"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYesAbsolute path to a repo directory on disk, or a GitHub URL (https://github.com/<owner>/<repo> — shallow-cloned to a tempdir and scanned).
topNNoHow many top-ranked opportunities to return. Default 15.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the regex-only, no-LLM/no-sandbox execution model, that GitHub URLs are shallow-cloned to a tempdir, and that output is ranked and auditable. Gaps remain around failure modes (invalid path, unreachable/private GitHub repos, auth needs) and what happens when nothing is found.

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?

A single dense paragraph that front-loads what the tool does before detailing detection patterns and execution characteristics. Every clause carries information, though the detection-pattern enumeration and the trailing 'Instant, free ... auditable' clause make it longer than strictly necessary for tool selection.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must describe returns, and it does: a ranked list where each item includes a ready-to-run prompt for build_connector. Combined with the disclosed execution model and language coverage, an agent has enough to invoke it correctly; only edge-case behavior (empty results, path errors) is unaddressed.

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 the schema already explains both `path` and `topN` with constraints. The description restates the path modes (local directory vs shallow-cloned GitHub URL) and mentions the ranked list, adding only marginal meaning beyond the structured fields.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Walk a repository ... and report the integration opportunities patchbay could build') and enumerates exactly what counts as an opportunity: webhook handlers with TODO/empty bodies, .env.example vendor entries with no implementation, TODO/FIXME vendor mentions, barely-used SDKs. It also scopes the languages/frameworks covered (Express/Next/Fastify and FastAPI/Flask), which lets an agent decide relevance without opening the schema.

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?

Implies the workflow position clearly: the output is a 'ready-to-run prompt the agent can hand straight to build_connector,' so the agent knows this is the discovery step preceding build_connector. It also signals cheapness ('Instant, free') which favors calling it early. It stops short of explicit when-not conditions or contrasts with audit_mcp_server/research_api.

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