Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
gowin-mcp

gowin-mcp

by Papipapito
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

List Gowin builds

gowin_list_builds
Read-onlyIdempotent

Locate Gowin EDA builds in a directory tree and return project names, devices, and build times, sorted newest first.

Instructions

Find Gowin EDA builds under a directory tree. Returns project name, device, and when each was built, newest first.

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": {
      "root": "<root>"
    },
    "name": "gowin_list_builds"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
rootYesDirectory to search.
formatNoOutput format. Default text: a compact rendering, returned as the only content. json: the full JSON as text and as structuredContent.
maxDepthNoSearch depth, default 8.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.2.2
    • addedInput schema / $schema
      Added value: +"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • addedInput schema / properties / format
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Output format. Default text: a compact rendering, returned as the only content. json: the full JSON as text and as structuredContent.",
+  "enum": [
+    "text",
+    "json"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.0-beta.1

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context by specifying result ordering (newest first) and the fields returned, but says nothing about recursion cost, depth-explosion risk, or behavior on a missing/inaccessible root.

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?

Two tight sentences: the action and scope come first, the return contract second. Every clause carries information and none restates the tool name or annotations.

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 read-only, single-required-param discovery tool with no output schema, the description supplies exactly the missing piece — what a result contains and how it is ordered. Combined with the fully covered schema and annotations, nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is absent.

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 description coverage is 100% — root, format, and maxDepth are each documented in the schema, including the text/json rendering distinction and the default depth of 8. The description's 'under a directory tree' only loosely restates the root parameter and adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 verb and resource ('Find Gowin EDA builds'), scopes it to 'under a directory tree', and enumerates the returned fields (project name, device, build time). It never distinguishes itself from siblings like gowin_check or gowin_summary, so it is clear but not sibling-differentiating.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent infers this is the discovery step for locating builds before drilling into gowin_timing or gowin_pins. No explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative is given, so the routing burden falls entirely on the sibling names.

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