Skip to main content
Glama
HakashiKatake

docorbit

by HakashiKatake
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

find_pitfall

Search documented pitfalls, breaking changes, deprecations, and runtime restrictions for a given feature or symbol before coding.

Instructions

Search documented pitfalls, gotchas, deprecations, breaking changes, and runtime restrictions.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindNoCategory filter for pitfalls.
limitNoMaximum number of pitfalls to return (default: 5).
queryYesTopic, feature, or symbol to inspect for pitfalls (e.g. "webhook raw body", "route params").
formatNoResponse format: "markdown" (default, human/agent-readable documentation) or "json" (structured raw machine data).
versionNoTarget documentation version filter.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.2.3
    • addedInput schema / properties / format
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Response format: \"markdown\" (default, human/agent-readable documentation) or \"json\" (structured raw machine data).",
+  "enum": [
+    "markdown",
+    "json"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.4

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
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 behavioral burden. It lists the kinds of content returned but does not disclose whether the search is read-only (implied but not stated), how results are ranked, whether pagination applies, or what happens on no match. For a search tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently enumerates the content scope. No redundant or filler language.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has 5 parameters, 100% schema coverage, and no output schema. The description covers the purpose and content types but omits usage context, behavioral traits, and return format expectations. It is minimally viable but leaves gaps for an agent deciding between search siblings.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all five parameters thoroughly, including enums, defaults, and examples. The description adds no parameter-specific detail beyond the kind categories, but the baseline for high coverage is 3; the description does reinforce the kind semantics by naming the categories. A 4 reflects that the schema does the heavy lifting and the description is adequate.

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 uses a specific verb (Search) and a clearly named resource (documented pitfalls, gotchas, deprecations, breaking changes, runtime restrictions). This distinguishes it from siblings like search_docs or find_api, which target different content types. However, it does not explicitly name those siblings or state what it is not, so it falls short of a 5.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus search_docs, find_api, or other search siblings. The description implies usage by listing pitfall categories but offers no context, prerequisites, or alternatives.

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