NPM Sentinel MCP

npmMaintenance

Read-onlyIdempotent

Analyze npm package maintenance metrics to assess release frequency, issue resolution, and contributor activity, helping identify under-maintained dependencies.

Instructions

Analyze package maintenance metrics

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`packages`	Yes	List of package names to analyze
`ignoreCache`	No	Force a fresh lookup, ignoring the cache

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`message`	No
`results`	No
`summary`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.24.0Jul 28, 2026
Removedv1.23.0Jul 25, 2026
Changed2 schema fields changedv1.20.0Jul 13, 2026
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
- addedInput schema / properties / ignoreCache
```
Added value: +{
+  "description": "Force a fresh lookup, ignoring the cache",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```
First observedv1.0.0Aug 14, 2025

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, covering the safety and idempotency profile effectively. The description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., data freshness, rate limits, or scope of metrics), but it does not contradict the annotations.

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?

The description is a single, short sentence that conveys the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. While it is very concise, the brevity is acceptable given the annotations and output schema, but a slightly more descriptive phrase would improve clarity.

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?

Given 18 sibling tools and likely complexity in npm analytics, the description is too minimal. It does not explain what 'maintenance metrics' entails, how results are presented (though output schema exists), or how it differs from closely related tools like npmScore or npmQuality. The annotations and output schema partially compensate, but the agent lacks essential decision-making info.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, with both parameters (packages, ignoreCache) fully described in the schema. The description adds no extra meaning or usage context for these parameters, so it meets the baseline without adding value.

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 clearly states the verb 'analyze' and resource 'package maintenance metrics', making the core purpose immediately understandable. However, among 18 sibling tools covering npm quality, score, maintainers, etc., the description does not differentiate what unique metrics 'maintenance' covers, which slightly limits precision.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like npmScore, npmQuality, or npmMaintainers. The description offers no context about appropriate use cases or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer from the name alone.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.