Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
checkpointer

checkpointer

by IronKommander
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Overwrite a specific chunk in a file.

edit_file_lines
Destructive

Replace a specified range of lines in a file with new content, using automatic snapshot for undo capability.

Instructions

To replace a specific chunk in a file from start_line inclusive to end_line inclusive with content(one based indexing for lines), after it's snapshot has been taken.

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": {
      "filepath": "<filepath>",
      "start_line": "<start_line>",
      "end_line": "<end_line>",
      "content": "<content>"
    },
    "name": "edit_file_lines"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contentYes
end_lineYes
filepathYes
start_lineYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already show destructiveHint=true; description adds snapshot requirement, one-based indexing, and chunk replacement semantics. Could clarify error handling for out-of-bounds lines.

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?

Single sentence front-loading purpose, but slightly run-on. Efficient yet could be split for clarity.

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?

Describes core functionality and snapshot requirement, but misses output schema mention, error cases, and file path context. Output schema exists but not referenced.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning for start_line, end_line (inclusive, one-based), and content, but filepath is not elaborated. Partial compensation.

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?

Clearly states verb 'replace a specific chunk' and resource 'file', with indexing detail. Distinguishes from siblings like str_replace and write_file. However, phrasing is slightly awkward.

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?

Implies prerequisite ('after its snapshot has been taken') but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use compared to siblings like str_replace or revert_file.

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