Repo Test Architect

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Analyze Repository

analyze_repository

Read-onlyIdempotent

Audit every project root in an unfamiliar repository to return deterministic test-architecture findings, blockers, rankings, a native test plan, verification commands, and stats.

Instructions

Start here for an unfamiliar repository or a general test-architecture review. Detect and audit all project roots once, then return the complete deterministic summary, blockers, findings, ranking, plan, execution hints, verification commands, and stats. Prefer this over audit_repo unless one project root and adapter were explicitly selected.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`goTarget`	No
`repoRoot`	Yes	Repository root path.
`changedPaths`	No	Optional repository-relative source paths to limit target selection inside detected projects.
`excludeProjectRoots`	No	Optional exact project roots or subtree patterns such as examples/** to exclude before analysis.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`root`	Yes
`stats`	Yes
`summary`	Yes
`findings`	Yes
`testPlan`	Yes
`auditSummary`	Yes
`projectAudits`	Yes
`schemaVersion`	Yes
`executionHints`	Yes
`candidateRanking`	Yes
`verificationCommands`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.0Oct 2, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$defs": {
+    "auditSummary": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "properties": {
+        "schemaVersion": {
+          "const": "project-audit-summary/v1"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "schemaVersion"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "candidateRanking": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "properties": {
+        "schemaVersion": {
+          "const": "project-candidate-ranking/v1"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "schemaVersion"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "executionHints": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "properties": {
+        "schemaVersion": {
+          "const": "plan-execution-hints/v1"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "schemaVersion"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "findings": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "properties": {
+        "schemaVersion": {
+          "const": "project-findings/v1"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "schemaVersion"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "projectAudits": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "properties": {
+        "schemaVersion": {
+          "const": "project-audits/v1"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "schemaVersion"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "stats": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "properties": {
+        "schemaVersion": {
+          "const": "project-stats/v1"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "schemaVersion"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "testPlan": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "properties": {
+        "schemaVersion": {
+          "const": "project-test-plan/v1"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "schemaVersion"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "$id": "repository-analysis-v1.schema.json",
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "auditSummary": {
+      "$ref": "#/$defs/auditSummary"
+    },
+    "candidateRanking": {
+      "$ref": "#/$defs/candidateRanking"
+    },
+    "executionHints": {
+      "$ref": "#/$defs/executionHints"
+    },
+    "findings": {
+      "$ref": "#/$defs/findings"
+    },
+    "projectAudits": {
+      "$ref": "#/$defs/projectAudits"
+    },
+    "root": {
+      "minLength": 1,
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "schemaVersion": {
+      "const": "repository-analysis/v1"
+    },
+    "stats": {
+      "$ref": "#/$defs/stats"
+    },
+    "summary": {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "properties": {
+        "auditCoverage": {
+          "enum": [
+            "complete",
+            "partial",
+            "none"
+          ]
+        },
+        "auditedProjectCount": {
+          "minimum": 0,
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "blockerCount": {
+          "minimum": 0,
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "candidateCount": {
+          "minimum": 0,
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "findingCount": {
+          "minimum": 0,
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "planItemCount": {
+          "minimum": 0,
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "projectCount": {
+          "minimum": 0,
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "unsupportedProjectCount": {
+          "minimum": 0,
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "verificationCommandCount": {
+          "minimum": 0,
+          "type": "integer"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "projectCount",
+        "auditedProjectCount",
+        "unsupportedProjectCount",
+        "auditCoverage",
+        "blockerCount",
+        "findingCount",
+        "candidateCount",
+        "planItemCount",
+        "verificationCommandCount"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "testPlan": {
+      "$ref": "#/$defs/testPlan"
+    },
+    "verificationCommands": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": false,
+        "properties": {
+          "command": {
+            "minLength": 1,
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "projectCount": {
+            "minimum": 1,
+            "type": "integer"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "command",
+          "projectCount"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "schemaVersion",
+    "root",
+    "summary",
+    "verificationCommands",
+    "projectAudits",
+    "auditSummary",
+    "findings",
+    "candidateRanking",
+    "testPlan",
+    "executionHints",
+    "stats"
+  ],
+  "title": "Repository Analysis Artifact",
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv0.1.0Aug 4, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, non-destructive), so the description rightly does not repeat that. It adds the operational fact that project roots are detected 'once' and that the return is a deterministic summary across several named artifact classes (blockers, findings, ranking, plan, etc.). It does not disclose performance limits or failure behavior for unreadable roots.

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?

Three tight sentences: entry condition first, then scope and return contents, then the sibling routing rule. Every clause carries information; there is no filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description need not enumerate return fields in full; naming the artifact classes is sufficient. With annotations covering the safety profile, four parameters, and a 75%-documented schema, the description is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly.

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 75% and the nested goTarget object is self-documenting, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific syntax or constraint details beyond what the schema already carries; its only parameter-adjacent signal is the audit_repo contrast, which implies single-root vs multi-root selection but does not explain repoRoot, changedPaths, or excludeProjectRoots.

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 states a specific verb ('Detect and audit') over a specific resource ('all project roots'), and explicitly distinguishes itself from a sibling: 'Prefer this over audit_repo unless one project root and adapter were explicitly selected.' This lets an agent route correctly without opening the other schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It opens with 'Start here for an unfamiliar repository or a general test-architecture review,' which is an explicit entry-point signal, and names the condition under which audit_repo is preferred. Both the when and the when-not are specified, along with the alternative.

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