Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
SDLC Command Center MCP Server

SDLC Command Center MCP Server

by Senpai-Sama7
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Plugin Preflight

sdlc_plugin_preflight
Read-onlyIdempotent

Validate plugin manifest, skill metadata, machine-readable skill contracts, and bundled command safety signatures.

Instructions

Validate a plugin manifest, skill metadata, machine-readable skill contracts, and bundled command safety signatures.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "sdlc_plugin_preflight"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pluginPathNoOptional plugin root. Defaults to this plugin's root.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statusNo
summaryNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds specific validation items (manifest, metadata, contracts, signatures), providing useful context beyond annotations.

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?

Single, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. All information is front-loaded.

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?

Description sufficiently explains the tool's function. Output schema exists, so return values are handled. However, missing error scenarios or validation outcomes could be added.

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 a description for the single optional parameter. Description adds no extra semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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?

Clearly states the tool validates plugin manifest, metadata, contracts, and signatures. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like sdlc_doctor or sdlc_read_file, which might have overlapping validation aspects.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Missing context on prerequisites (e.g., plugin must be installed) or recommended use cases.

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