Skip to main content
Glama

tarn_impact

Identify which .tarn.yaml tests are affected by a change using files, endpoints, openapi operations, or git diff output, with confidence levels and run hints.

Instructions

Map a change (files / endpoints / openapi ops / git diff) to the .tarn.yaml tests it most likely affects, with confidence tiers and run hints. Read-only: no HTTP and no test execution. Equivalent to: tarn impact --format json.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cwdNoAbsolute path to the project root. Defaults to the workspace root captured during MCP `initialize`, or the server process's current directory.
diffNoWhen true, run `git diff --name-only HEAD` under `cwd` and feed the result in as changed files.
endpointsNoEndpoints touched by the change. Each entry is either a `METHOD:/path` string or a `{method, path}` object.
filesNoChanged source files as plain strings.
min_confidenceNoDrop matches below this tier before returning.
no_default_excludesNoDisable the default discovery ignore rules (e.g. `.git`, `node_modules`).
openapi_opsNoOpenAPI `operationId`s whose behaviour changed.
pathNoRestrict test discovery to this subpath (file or directory). Relative paths resolve against `cwd`.
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states the tool is read-only, does not execute tests or make HTTP calls, and maps changes to tests with confidence tiers. This provides a complete picture of the tool's behavior and constraints.

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?

The description is extremely concise (two sentences): the first delivers the core purpose, and the second adds safety information and a CLI reference. Every word contributes meaning, with no redundancy or filler.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the complexity of 8 parameters and no output schema, the description provides high-level context about inputs and outputs (confidence tiers, run hints) and a CLI equivalent that implies JSON output structure. While not fully detailed, it adequately covers the essential aspects for an agent to decide to invoke the tool.

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?

The schema covers 100% of parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by grouping input types (files, endpoints, openapi_ops, git diff) and linking them to the concept of confidence tiers (related to min_confidence), enhancing the agent's understanding of how parameters interplay.

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 clearly states the tool maps changes (files, endpoints, openapi_ops, or git diff) to affected tests with confidence tiers and run hints. It explicitly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like tarn_run by stating 'Read-only: no HTTP and no test execution,' ensuring the agent understands it is an analysis-only tool.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides context on when to use the tool (for impact analysis without execution) and gives a precise CLI equivalent (".tarn impact --format json"). However, it does not explicitly discuss when not to use it or mention alternative tools for different tasks, leaving some room for ambiguity.

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/NazarKalytiuk/tarn'

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