Skip to main content
Glama
carlosphyll

phyll

by carlosphyll
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

guide

Fetch a named section of Phyll's review method—walkthrough, heuristics, report-format, fixing, or tells—and get its text. Requires an active review session.

Instructions

Get one part of Phyll's review method from its engine, when the method you received points to it. Needs a review started with start_review. Returns the guide's text.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesWhich guide: walkthrough (framing and evidence), heuristics (severity, principles and checklists), report-format (how to write report.json), fixing (fix mode) or tells (the catalog of AI tells).
tellsNoTell ids to fetch from the tells guide, such as F05 and L01, up to 20. Without ids, the tells guide returns the catalog's contents.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.4.6
    • addedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Added value: +"Which guide: walkthrough (framing and evidence), heuristics (severity, principles and checklists), report-format (how to write report.json), fixing (fix mode) or tells (the catalog of AI tells)."
    • changedInput schema / properties / tells / description
      Previous value: -"Tell ids such as F05 and L01, for the tells guide"New value: +"Tell ids to fetch from the tells guide, such as F05 and L01, up to 20. Without ids, the tells guide returns the catalog's contents."
  2. First observedv0.4.5

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the dependency on an active review and states the return value is the guide's text, but it does not clarify side effects (though 'get' implies read-only), error behavior, or what happens if the prerequisite is not met. This is adequate but not rich.

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 focused sentences with no wasted words. The core operation is stated first, followed by the prerequisite and return value. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a simple read-style tool with full schema coverage, the description covers the key context: when to call it, what it needs, and what it returns. It does not explain error cases or the exact meaning of 'the method received', but it is sufficient for an agent to use the tool successfully in the described flow.

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 the parameter descriptions already explain each enum value and the tells behavior, including the no-ids fallback. The tool description adds no new parameter-level semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description clearly states the action ('Get one part of Phyll's review method...') and the resource (guide text from the review engine), distinguishing it from sibling tools that perform scanning or capture actions. The phrases 'from its engine' and 'when the method you received points to it' are somewhat jargon-heavy but do not obscure the core purpose.

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 description gives a clear usage condition ('when the method you received points to it') and an explicit prerequisite ('Needs a review started with start_review'). It does not enumerate when not to use the tool or name alternatives, but the prerequisite provides enough context for correct invocation.

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