Skip to main content
Glama
HakashiKatake

docorbit

by HakashiKatake
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

export_agent_context

Generate AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, skill.md, llms.txt, or docs-map.md context files grounded in project dependency versions and authoritative docs for coding agents.

Instructions

Deterministically generate and export agent-native documentation context files (AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, skill.md, llms.txt, docs-map.md) grounded in project dependency versions and authoritative documentation.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
formatNoTarget agent file format to generate (default: "agents.md").
docVersionNoOptional target documentation version (e.g. "v14", "v15").
projectDirNoOptional project directory for resolving workspace dependency versions.
targetSourceNoOptional library or skill name label.
responseFormatNoResponse output format: "markdown" (default, raw exported content) or "json" (structured metadata).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.2.3
    • addedInput schema / properties / responseFormat
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Response output format: \"markdown\" (default, raw exported content) or \"json\" (structured metadata).",
+  "enum": [
+    "markdown",
+    "json"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.7
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "format"
-]
  3. First observedv0.1.4

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it never says whether files are written to disk, where they land, whether existing files are overwritten, or what permissions are needed. 'Deterministically' implies reproducibility but discloses nothing about side effects or failure modes for a tool whose name promises an export.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler; the parenthetical format list is functional rather than padding. It is dense but every clause (determinism, file types, grounding sources) contributes to selection.

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?

For a 5-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is thin: it omits output destination, side effects, and any relationship to the many sibling context-gathering tools. The responseFormat parameter hints at return shape, but the description never confirms what an agent actually receives.

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 are already documented in the schema, making 3 the baseline. The description adds only the framing that output is 'grounded in project dependency versions', which loosely ties projectDir/docVersion together but supplies no syntax or format detail beyond the schema.

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 pair ('generate and export') and a concrete resource ('agent-native documentation context files'), then enumerates the exact artifacts (AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, skill.md, llms.txt, docs-map.md). No sibling tool in the list produces or exports files, so it is distinguishable from the search/get/find family at a glance.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative. An agent cannot tell from the description whether to reach for this versus get_implementation_context or get_documentation_map when assembling agent context. Usage is only inferable from the file-format list.

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