Repo Test Architect

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

List Project Detection Rules

list_project_detection_rules

Read-onlyIdempotent

View deterministic project marker rules and ignored directories used during repository detection, so you can understand or debug how projects are identified.

Instructions

List deterministic project marker rules and ignored directories used during project detection.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`markers`	Yes
`fallbackRules`	No
`schemaVersion`	Yes
`ignoredDirectories`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.0Oct 2, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$id": "project-detection-rules-v1.schema.json",
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "fallbackRules": {
+      "items": {
+        "minLength": 1,
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "ignoredDirectories": {
+      "items": {
+        "minLength": 1,
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "markers": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": false,
+        "oneOf": [
+          {
+            "required": [
+              "fileName"
+            ]
+          },
+          {
+            "required": [
+              "extension"
+            ]
+          },
+          {
+            "required": [
+              "directoryExtension"
+            ]
+          }
+        ],
+        "properties": {
+          "directoryExtension": {
+            "minLength": 1,
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "ecosystem": {
+            "minLength": 1,
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "extension": {
+            "minLength": 1,
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "fileName": {
+            "minLength": 1,
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "languages": {
+            "items": {
+              "minLength": 1,
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            "minItems": 1,
+            "type": "array"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "ecosystem",
+          "languages"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "minItems": 1,
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "schemaVersion": {
+      "const": "project-detection-rules/v1"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "schemaVersion",
+    "markers",
+    "ignoredDirectories"
+  ],
+  "title": "Project Detection Rules Artifact",
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv0.1.0Aug 4, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior. The description adds context that the listed rules are deterministic and related to project detection, but does not disclose further behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the tool's scope immediately and clearly.

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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only list tool with rich annotations and an output schema, the description adequately conveys what is returned. The only minor gap is the absence of usage context relative to sibling tools.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the schema baseline applies. The description does not need to describe parameter semantics, and no additional parameter information is required for this tool.

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 names a specific verb ('List') and precise resources ('deterministic project marker rules and ignored directories used during project detection'). It clearly distinguishes this tool's output from sibling tools like detect_projects or list_adapters.

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?

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any conditions or prerequisites. It only states what is listed, leaving usage context entirely implicit.

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