Skip to main content
Glama

scan_repo

Read-onlyIdempotent

Inventory the cryptography inside a local directory tree, file by file, returning each algorithm with its file, line, and quantum risk classification to show what a project actually uses.

Instructions

Inventory the cryptography inside one local directory tree, file by file.

Reads source, configuration (nginx.conf, sshd_config, .ini, .toml), CI pipelines, Terraform and Kubernetes manifests under path. Returns each algorithm found with its file and line, the mathematical family and standing of every post-quantum scheme, and a coverage count.

Use this to answer what a specific project on this machine actually uses. Do not use it to ask whether this server knows a given algorithm, or to explain how one is classified without scanning anything -- list_algorithms answers that from the same table and reads no files. It is also the wrong tool for a network endpoint, a running host or a certificate store: it opens files on disk and nothing else.

Coverage is reported as a fraction with a base. files_scanned + unreadable_files + files_skipped_by_type == files_present. A file that could not be opened is listed, never counted as scanned, because no findings in a file nobody read is not the same as a file that is clean. Files skipped because this tool does not claim their type are counted by extension, so the reader can judge the boundary rather than assume past it.

Cost scales with the size of the tree, so a large monorepo takes proportionally longer; there is no cache and no partial mode.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYesDirectory to scan, absolute or relative to the working directory: a checked-out repository, a service directory, a config tree. Vendored and build directories (.git, node_modules, vendor, dist, build, target) are excluded and do not count toward files_present.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.6.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / path / description
      Added value: +"Directory to scan, absolute or relative to the working directory: a checked-out repository, a service directory, a config tree. Vendored and build directories (.git, node_modules, vendor, dist, build, target) are excluded and do not count toward files_present."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent/destructive annotations, the description discloses coverage arithmetic, unreadable files listed but not counted, skipped-by-type behavior, exclusions, no cache, no partial mode, and that cost scales with tree size. Nothing material about side effects or limits is hidden.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Purpose is front-loaded and the description is organized into clear blocks: scope, outputs, usage boundaries, coverage semantics, cost. It is slightly longer than strictly necessary, but every block contributes decision-relevant information.

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 one-parameter read-only tool, the description covers input semantics, output coverage, exclusions, failure handling, cost, and alternative tools. The presence of an output schema means return-value details do not need to be duplicated, so nothing material is missing.

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 single path parameter is already fully described in the schema (absolute/relative, repo/service/config tree, excluded vendored/build directories), so schema coverage is 100%. The description reinforces what `path` points at and adds file types read, but parameter semantics are adequately carried by the schema; no compensation needed.

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?

Opening sentence names a specific verb and resource: 'Inventory the cryptography inside one local directory tree, file by file.' It states what is read and returned (algorithms with file/line, families, coverage count), and the sibling list_algorithms is explicitly positioned as the read-no-files alternative, so the tool is not confused with it.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use ('answer what a specific project ... actually uses'), explicit when-not-to-use (server algorithm knowledge, explanation without scanning, network endpoints, running hosts, certificate stores), and names the alternative list_algorithms that 'reads no files.' This is exactly the level of routing guidance an agent needs.

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