Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
SapperMCP

SapperMCP

by MasterX1582
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Sapper Setup

sapper_setup

Enable Sapper in a project by creating the .sapper directory and registering Claude Code hooks in .claude/settings.json.

Instructions

Opt a project IN: create .sapper/ + register Claude Code hooks in <project_dir>/.claude/settings.json (like sapper setup).

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": {
      "project_dir": "<project_dir>"
    },
    "name": "sapper_setup"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
goalNo
forceNo
storeNo.sapper
agentsNo
originNo
project_dirYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does disclose the concrete side effects: creating .sapper/ and writing hooks into .claude/settings.json. It does not say whether existing hooks are merged or overwritten, what force actually forces, whether the operation is idempotent, or whether the settings file is created if absent.

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 that names the outcome first and then the concrete artifacts touched. No filler or redundancy, though it is arguably too terse given the parameter surface it must cover.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but this is a configuration-mutating setup tool with no annotations and five undocumented parameters. An agent cannot tell what force, store, agents, or origin do, nor what happens to pre-existing hook configuration, which is a material omission for a tool that edits user settings.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Six parameters with 0% schema description coverage, yet the description only references project_dir (via '<project_dir>'). The semantics of goal, force, store, agents, and origin are left entirely undefined in both schema and prose, so the description fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

States a specific action pair: 'Opt a project IN', creating a .sapper/ directory and registering Claude Code hooks in .claude/settings.json. That is concrete enough for an agent to know exactly what the tool does. It does not distinguish itself from the closely named sibling sapper_init, which likely has overlapping initialization semantics.

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?

The phrase 'Opt a project IN' implies this is the enrollment step for a project, which gives implicit usage context. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer this over sapper_init or other setup-adjacent siblings, and no note on prerequisites such as an existing repository or prior init.

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