Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@snippkit/mcp-server

@snippkit/mcp-server

by Yaseen549
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

snippkit_save_snippet

Save generated or refactored code to your SnippKit library so reusable solutions persist across projects and environments.

Instructions

Save newly generated or refactored code directly into your SnippKit library. Persists solutions across your projects and environments.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "title": "<title>",
      "code": "<code>"
    },
    "name": "snippkit_save_snippet"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
codeYesThe source code to save
tagsNoArray of tags for searching
titleYesClear, descriptive title for the snippet
languageNoProgramming language (e.g. 'typescript', 'python', 'sql', 'bash')plaintext
is_publicNoSet to true for public snippet, false for zero-knowledge encrypted private snippet
descriptionNoBrief explanation of what this code does and when to use it

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden for a write operation. It says nothing about whether an existing snippet with the same title is overwritten or rejected, what permissions are needed, what is returned on success, or — notably — that the default is a zero-knowledge encrypted private snippet, a significant behavior disclosed only in the schema.

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?

Two compact sentences with the action and destination front-loaded; nothing is redundant. The second sentence ("Persists solutions across your projects and environments") is marketing-adjacent and contributes little operational value.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a six-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should cover return value, duplicate handling, and the public-vs-encrypted default. None of that is present, leaving an agent unable to predict the result of a save.

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 100%, so all six parameters including defaults for language and is_public are already documented in the schema. The description adds no semantic detail on any parameter, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ("Save") and resource ("code") with a clear destination ("your SnippKit library"), and the scope phrase "newly generated or refactored code" narrows the intent. It is clearly distinguishable from the get_/search_ siblings, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with them.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

"Save newly generated or refactored code" implies when to reach for this tool, which is a reasonable usage cue. But there are no exclusions, no mention of how it relates to the search/get siblings, and no prerequisites (auth, library existence, duplicate-title behavior).

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