Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MCP-researcher Server

MCP-researcher Server

by clssck
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

check_deprecated_code

Identify deprecated features in code or dependencies to prevent compatibility issues and maintain code quality.

Instructions

Check if code or dependencies might be using deprecated features

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "code": "<code>"
    },
    "name": "check_deprecated_code"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
codeYesThe code snippet or dependency to check
technologyNoThe technology or framework context (e.g., 'React', 'Node.js')

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The description does not disclose behavioral traits beyond its basic function. It does not state if the check is read-only, whether it executes the code, what input format is expected, or what output is produced. With no annotations, this lack of detail is a significant gap.

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?

The description is a single, focused sentence with no redundant information. It gets straight to the point.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Despite the small parameter count, the description lacks crucial information about the tool's behavior and return value. Without an output schema or annotations, the agent is left without a clear picture of what to expect. The description is too minimal to be complete.

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?

The schema fully describes both parameters (code and technology), so the description doesn't need to elaborate. The description adds no additional parameter context beyond the schema, aligning with the baseline score of 3.

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 tool's function: checking code or dependencies for deprecated features. It distinguishes from sibling tools like search and get_documentation by focusing on deprecation analysis rather than general information retrieval.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search or get_documentation. The description only states what it does, implying usage but offering no exclusions or comparison.

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