Skip to main content
Glama
RP-Digital-Innovations

Context Snipe

by RP-Digital-Innovations
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
Rust
Local

Server Quality Checklist

67%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.

  • Latest release: v0.3.0

  • Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools have completely distinct purposes: one scans project dependencies and the other checks them against a vulnerability database. There is no overlap or ambiguity.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tools follow a clear verb_noun pattern: scan_dependencies and check_vulnerabilities, making the action and target immediately clear.

    Tool Count4/5

    With only two tools, the server is minimal but well-scoped for its purpose. Each tool serves a necessary function, and the count is appropriate given the narrow focus.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool set covers the core workflow of listing dependencies and checking for known vulnerabilities. Minor gaps exist, such as lacking ability to fetch detailed advisory information or take action on findings, but the basic functionality is complete.

  • Average 4.2/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.

    See the Tool Scores section below for per-tool breakdowns.

    • No community issues in the last 6 months
    • 10 commits in the last 12 weeks
    • Last stable release on
    • No critical vulnerability alerts
    • No high-severity vulnerability alerts
    • No code scanning findings
    • CI is passing

  • This repository is licensed under MIT License.

  • This repository includes a README.md file.

  • No tool usage detected in the last 30 days. Usage tracking helps demonstrate server value.

    Tip: use the "Try in Browser" feature on the server page to seed initial usage.

  • Add a glama.json file to provide metadata about your server.

  • If you are the author, simply .

    If the server belongs to an organization, first add glama.json to the root of your repository:

    {
  "$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/server.json",
  "maintainers": [
    "your-github-username"
  ]
}

    Then . Browse examples.

  • Add related servers to improve discoverability.

How to sync the server with GitHub?

Servers are automatically synced at least once per day, but you can also sync manually at any time to instantly update the server profile.

To manually sync the server, click the "Sync Server" button in the MCP server admin interface.

How is the quality score calculated?

The overall quality score combines two components: Tool Definition Quality (70%) and Server Coherence (30%).

Tool Definition Quality measures how well each tool describes itself to AI agents. Every tool is scored 1–5 across six dimensions: Purpose Clarity (25%), Usage Guidelines (20%), Behavioral Transparency (20%), Parameter Semantics (15%), Conciseness & Structure (10%), and Contextual Completeness (10%). The server-level definition quality score is calculated as 60% mean TDQS + 40% minimum TDQS, so a single poorly described tool pulls the score down.

Server Coherence evaluates how well the tools work together as a set, scoring four dimensions equally: Disambiguation (can agents tell tools apart?), Naming Consistency, Tool Count Appropriateness, and Completeness (are there gaps in the tool surface?).

Tiers are derived from the overall score: A (≥3.5), B (≥3.0), C (≥2.0), D (≥1.0), F (<1.0). B and above is considered passing.

Tool Scores

  • Behavior4/5

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

    With no annotations, the description covers key behaviors: it is a read-only check (implied), requires network access, and only reports advisories for packages in the dependency tree. It does not mention side effects or permissions, but the read-only nature is clear.

    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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a clarifying statement and a note on requirements. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

    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 tool has two parameters and no output schema, the description explains the main behavior, scope, and constraint (network access). It could mention how dependencies are resolved or the output format, but the provided information is sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's function.

    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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema (e.g., no details on 'path' or 'severity_min'). Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already documents the parameters adequately.

    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 provides a specific verb ('cross-reference') and resource ('project's resolved dependencies against the OSV.dev vulnerability database'), and clearly differentiates from the sibling tool 'scan_dependencies' by focusing on vulnerability advisories rather than generic dependency scanning.

    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 states when to use (to get relevant advisories for actual dependencies) and mentions a requirement (network access). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or contrast with alternatives beyond the sibling distinction.

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

  • Behavior4/5

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

    With no annotations, the description fully explains behavior: it parses specific files and returns dependency details. It does not disclose side effects, but the tool is likely read-only. The description is sufficiently transparent for a simple listing tool.

    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 two sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the key action and list of files, then explains utility. Every sentence adds value.

    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?

    The tool is simple (one parameter, no output schema). The description covers what, how, and why. It does not mention error handling or behavior when no lockfiles are found, but it's otherwise complete.

    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?

    There is only one parameter (path) with 100% schema coverage. The description adds context about the path being the project directory, but the schema already describes it. The description does not go into depth beyond the schema, earning a baseline score.

    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 specifies the tool lists resolved dependencies by parsing lockfiles/manifests, naming specific files (Cargo.lock, package-lock.json, etc.) and return fields (name, version, ecosystem). It clearly distinguishes from sibling check_vulnerabilities.

    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 advises using it to give the assistant ground-truth about project dependencies, indicating clear context for use. It does not explicitly exclude scenarios or mention when not to use it, but the sibling tool provides a natural alternative.

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

GitHub Badge

Glama performs regular codebase and documentation scans to:

  • Confirm that the MCP server is working as expected.
  • Confirm that there are no obvious security issues.
  • Evaluate tool definition quality.

Our badge communicates server capabilities, safety, and installation instructions.

Card Badge

context-snipe MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

context-snipe MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

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/RP-Digital-Innovations/context-snipe'

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