Skip to main content
Glama
KasayoDotCom

Identity Forge MCP

Official

Has the applied kit moved since this repo was built?

check_applied_theme

Inspect a project's saved identity stamp to identify what changed since the theme was applied: kit version, design document, or contract shape, and detect manually edited artifacts.

Instructions

Read the identityforge.json stamp in a project on disk and report what has moved since apply_theme wrote it. Takes no kit and no version: the stamp holds both, which is what makes this the tool to reach for when returning to a project rather than reconstructing the arguments for diff_kit_versions by hand. It reports THREE independent movements and never conflates them. kitMoved: the server's own version count differs, so the design itself changed and the brief is worth re-reading. documentMoved: the rendered DESIGN.md bytes differ, which a serializer change alone does to every kit at once and is not by itself a reason to touch code. contractMoved: designMdContract differs, so the document's SHAPE changed and a section was added, renamed or removed. Each is null rather than false when one side cannot answer, with a note saying which. When the kit did move and both versions are numbers, the diff_kit_versions result is included, so one call answers both what moved and how. It also hashes every artifact the stamp recorded against what is on disk, so a DESIGN.md edited by hand shows as modified before anything overwrites it. Read-only: it writes nothing and touches no file, so it is safe to call at the start of any session. Losing a key or hitting a Pro gate degrades it to a local-only report with a note rather than failing.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dirNoProject directory holding identityforge.json, absolute or relative to the server's working directory. Default: the MCP server's working directory. Same meaning as apply_theme's dir.
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and exceeds it: it discloses read-only behavior, that it writes nothing and touches no file, the three independent movement types and their meanings, null-versus-false semantics, inclusion of diff results, artifact hashing, and graceful degradation on missing keys/Pro gates. This is far beyond typical transparency.

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?

Despite being long, every sentence earns its place: primary action, alternative justification, three-movement breakdown, null semantics, diff inclusion, hashing, safety, and degradation. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the density is warranted for the tool's complexity.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a complex tool with no output schema, the description fully explains return fields, edge cases (null values, missing keys, Pro gates), and practical implications. It makes the tool actionable without needing additional external knowledge, and it clearly separates concerns like serializer-only changes versus contract changes.

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?

The schema already covers the only parameter (dir) with 100% coverage, including default and path meaning. The description adds context about the stamp holding kit/version, but does not add parameter-level syntax or format beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb+resource ('Read the identityforge.json stamp in a project on disk and report what has moved') and immediately distinguishes the tool from diff_kit_versions by noting it takes no kit and no version. The title also reinforces the purpose as a question, making the tool's unique role clear.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It explicitly says when to use this tool ('returning to a project') and names the alternative (diff_kit_versions), explaining why this avoids 'reconstructing the arguments' by hand. It also states it is safe to call at the start of any session, providing clear context for when it should be preferred.

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/KasayoDotCom/identityforge-mcp'

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