smart-coding-mcp
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": true
} |
| logging | {} |
| prompts | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| resources | {
"subscribe": false,
"listChanged": false
} |
| extensions | {
"io.modelcontextprotocol/ui": {}
} |
| experimental | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| record_lessonA | Record a lesson into the persistent store. Returns the new lesson. |
| recall_lessonsA | Recall top-k lessons matching |
| recent_lessonsB | Return the most-recent lessons (chronological). |
| by_categoryA | Return lessons filtered by category (most-recent first). |
| mark_lesson_usedA | Bump |
| store_statsB | Return total and per-category counts. |
| analyze_pathB | Run deterministic static checks. Returns Markdown report + raw findings list. |
| get_conventionsA | Return the full AGENTS.md content (auto-curated project conventions). |
| set_conventionA | Append a new convention to AGENTS.md and return its line number. |
| propose_fixA | Suggest a fix sketch by combining the issue with k similar past lessons. This is deterministic text-stitching — no LLM is called. The orchestrator (which has the LLM) reads the result and decides whether to apply. |
| reflectA | Return a Markdown draft of new AGENTS.md conventions from recent lessons. The orchestrator curates which lines to apply by calling set_convention() for each. The agent itself does no LLM calls — the draft is a deterministic aggregation of stored signals (category breakdown, frequently-recurring tags, never-recalled lessons, top-referenced). |
| lint_checkA | Run external linter(s) and test runner; return findings + summary. Each tool maps to the same Finding shape the built-in analyzer uses, with
|
| doctor_toolA | Same report as Useful when the orchestrator wants to spot-check the installation during a session. |
| health_checkA | Return a structured JSON snapshot for monitoring. Fields: ok boolean — always true if the store could be opened schema_version stored schema_version current_schema version this code expects wal_mode WAL / journal-mode status db_path absolute path to the SQLite file db_size_bytes file size on disk lessons_total row count in the lessons table conventions_path where AGENTS.md lives conventions_writable bool — whether AGENTS.md can be appended to Use this for liveness/readiness checks, not for hot-path validation. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| code_review | Structured prompt that asks the orchestrator to review code thoroughly. |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| memory_recent | Markdown list of the most recent 20 lessons. |
| memory_stats | Markdown summary of the lesson store. |
| conventions_current | Full content of the project AGENTS.md. |
TDQS
Scored across 14 tools
Most tools have distinct purposes, but there is overlap between analyze_path and lint_check (both analyze code) and between recall_lessons and recent_lessons (both retrieve lessons). Descriptions help differentiate, but ambiguity remains.
Naming conventions are inconsistent, mixing verb_noun (e.g., recall_lessons), noun-only (e.g., health_check), and compound names (e.g., mark_lesson_used). No clear pattern across tools.
14 tools is well within the typical 3-15 range for a focused server, covering lessons, code analysis, and configuration without feeling excessive.
The tool surface covers core CRUD for lessons and static analysis, but lacks a delete lesson tool and an apply fix tool, representing notable gaps for complete workflows.