Verified Repo Memory MCP

vrm_search

Search for repository memory candidates using the Verified Repo Memory MCP server to find code-related information without immediate verification.

Instructions

Search for candidates (no JIT verification, fast).

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": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "vrm_search"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	Yes
`limit`	No
`includeExpired`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Feb 21, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It does reveal a meaningful behavioral trait: no JIT verification, implying results may be cached/stale but fast. However, it doesn't explain what JIT verification means for result freshness or mention any other side effects or requirements.

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?

A single concise sentence with the core action front-loaded. The phrase 'no JIT verification, fast' is efficient but somewhat cryptic; no filler, though the jargon could be clearer.

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?

For a 3-parameter search tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It leaves out expected result format, default behaviors (limit=20, includeExpired=false), and what distinguishes a verified vs unverified search. The qualifier adds some color but not enough context for confident invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no parameter-specific explanation. It doesn't mention that limit controls result count, includeExpired includes expired candidates, or how query is matched, so it fails to compensate for the undocumented schema.

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 uses the specific verb+resource 'search for candidates,' which clearly tells the agent what the tool does. It doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling tools like vrm_list, but the operation is unambiguous.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives are mentioned. The parenthetical '(no JIT verification, fast)' hints at a performance trade-off but does not tell the agent when to prefer this over vrm_list or other siblings.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server