Global Executables

Check executable names in batch

check_executables

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check multiple exact CLI command names for collisions across npm, PyPI, crates.io, Go, Debian, and more in one indexed snapshot. Results preserve order and never run software or query live registries.

Instructions

Check several exact command names for collisions in one indexed snapshot.

    Use this for multiple candidates; use check_executable for one, and do not use it to rank
    similar spellings—use search_similar_executables. One scope filters every name with AND
    semantics; each name is evaluated independently and results, including duplicates, preserve
    input order. The tool makes no live registry call and never runs software; treat misses as
    unknown unless coverage_scope is exhaustive, which a supplied scope never is.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`names`	Yes	Executable command names to process in one request. Each value follows the same exact, case-sensitive rules as name, and results preserve input order.
`scope`	No	Optional provider filters: source_type, package_system, distribution_family, distribution, distribution_release, language, registry, or ecosystem. All supplied key-value pairs must match; scoped negative results remain non-exhaustive.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.1.2Oct 20, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / names / description

Added value: +"Executable command names to process in one request. Each value follows the same exact, case-sensitive rules as name, and results preserve input order."

addedInput schema / properties / scope / description

Added value: +"Optional provider filters: source_type, package_system, distribution_family, distribution, distribution_release, language, registry, or ecosystem. All supplied key-value pairs must match; scoped negative results remain non-exhaustive."

First observedv0.1.0Oct 20, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), and the description adds genuinely new behavior: no live registry call, never executes software, misses are 'unknown' rather than negative, and supplied scopes are never exhaustive. This is exactly the caveat an agent needs to avoid over-interpreting results.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then alternatives, then semantics and caveats. Every clause earns its place, though the second half is dense with em-dash asides and could be tightened slightly.

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?

With an output schema present and annotations covering safety, the description supplies the remaining essentials: batch semantics, ordering guarantees, alternatives, and the non-exhaustive-coverage caveat. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds cross-parameter semantics the schema does not state per-field: one scope filters every name with AND semantics, each name is evaluated independently, and duplicates are preserved in input order. That explains how the two parameters interact in a batch call.

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?

States a specific verb (check), resource (several exact command names), and scope (collisions in one indexed snapshot), and immediately distinguishes itself from the singular check_executable. An agent can identify the batch variant without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly routes usage: 'Use this for multiple candidates; use check_executable for one, and do not use it to rank similar spellings—use search_similar_executables.' It names both alternatives and the exclusion condition, leaving nothing 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