Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ai-secure-by-design

ai-secure-by-design

by ankush1982
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Plan a deploy

sbd_plan_deploy
Read-onlyIdempotent

Preview deployment changes for required security scaffolds by reporting whether each file would be created, updated, overwritten, skipped, or blocked without writing anything.

Instructions

Report what sbd deploy would do to each required scaffold: create, update, overwrite, skip (edited or user-authored) or blocked. Writes nothing; the user runs sbd deploy to apply it.

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": "sbd_plan_deploy"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
forceNoPlan as if --force were set.
stackNoTemplate stack. Default: product.stack in the manifest, then detection.
manifestPathNoManifest path relative to the workspace root. Default privacy-security-manifest.yaml.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description still adds value by enumerating the outcome states the report can contain, including the subtle 'skip (edited or user-authored)' case, and by clarifying the human-in-the-loop handoff to `sbd deploy`.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted wording: the first front-loads what is produced, the second states the no-write guarantee and the next action. The parenthetical about edited or user-authored scaffolds is compact and informative.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully carries return-value semantics by listing the possible per-scaffold statuses. All three optional parameters are fully documented in the schema, so nothing needed to invoke the tool is missing; only the relationship to sibling planning tools is underexplained.

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% and each of force, stack, and manifestPath is documented there with defaults. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, 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 reporting action and enumerates the result categories (create, update, overwrite, skip, blocked) for required scaffolds, which lets an agent distinguish a deploy preview from a plain validate or scan. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from the close sibling sbd_plan_scaffold, leaving some ambiguity about which planner to pick.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The clause 'Writes nothing; the user runs `sbd deploy` to apply it' gives a clear usage context: this is the dry-run preview step before an actual deploy. It provides no explicit exclusions or named alternatives (e.g., sbd_plan_scaffold, sbd_plan_init), so routing between the sibling plan_* tools is left to inference.

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