Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
whodb-cli

whodb-cli

Official
by clidey
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Go
Remote

whodb_platform_project_health

Read-onlyIdempotent

Returns a compact readiness health summary for a hosted project, combining counts, checks, warnings, scope, and suggested next actions.

Instructions

Return a compact health summary for the selected hosted project.

Use this for readiness diagnostics after whodb_platform_workspace_summary or whodb_platform_gap_analysis. It combines project counts, readiness checks, warnings, selected scope, and top suggested next actions. Accepts workspace {host, org, project} for per-call targeting without changing defaults.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
goalNoOptional user goal used to keep suggested actions relevant.
fieldsNoTop-level output fields to include, for example actions, warnings, goal.
workspaceNoOptional target for this call only. Omit to use the session default set by whodb_platform_session_use, then process/saved defaults. Discover targets with whodb_platform_hosts, whodb_platform_orgs and whodb_platform_projects.
omit_filesNoOmit root folder file and folder summaries. Defaults to false.
function_idNoFor runtime readiness, inspect the latest persisted run of this function without executing it.
omit_lineageNoOmit project lineage summary. Defaults to false.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.136.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / function_id
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "For runtime readiness, inspect the latest persisted run of this function without executing it.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Addedv0.135.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint), so credit here goes to the extra context: the response contents are enumerated and function_id is described as inspecting the latest persisted run "without executing it," which prevents a costly misinterpretation. No mention of permission requirements, latency, or payload size limits.

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?

Three sentences with the purpose front-loaded ahead of the sequencing hint and the targeting note. The content list in sentence two is slightly dense but every clause carries real information.

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 does the right thing by summarizing what the response bundles together, and all six optional params are schema-documented. Only a rough sense of the response's shape or size is missing, which is a minor gap for a read-only diagnostic.

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 coverage is 100% and every parameter already has a description, so the baseline is 3. The description restates the workspace targeting behavior ("per-call targeting without changing defaults") and the non-executing function_id behavior already in the schema, and never mentions goal, fields, omit_files, or omit_lineage.

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?

The first sentence states a specific verb and resource ("Return a compact health summary for the selected hosted project") and the second enumerates the exact content (project counts, readiness checks, warnings, scope, suggested actions). Naming whodb_platform_workspace_summary and whodb_platform_gap_analysis as predecessors lets an agent place it among the many diagnostic siblings.

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 explicitly says when to reach for it: "readiness diagnostics after whodb_platform_workspace_summary or whodb_platform_gap_analysis," which is a real sequencing rule rather than generic advice. It does not say when to prefer runtime_readiness, next_actions, setup_status, or doctor instead, so the exclusion side is only partially covered.

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