project-code-intelligence

by cvandesande

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

search_static_findings

Search static analysis findings by project, tool, rule, severity, or file path to quickly locate specific code issues.

Instructions

Search SARIF/static-analysis findings with exact filters.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "search_static_findings"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`collection`	No
`repo`	No
`tool`	No
`rule_id`	No
`level`	No
`baseline_state`	No
`source_path`	No
`snapshot_id`	No
`include_historical`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0May 12, 2026

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations and a terse description, important behavioral details are missing, such as how filters combine (AND/OR), pagination behavior, performance considerations, or what happens when no filters are applied. The agent is left to infer behavior from the schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence, which is concise but lacks structure. It could be improved by adding a second sentence to mention key behavioral aspects without adding much length.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given 10 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. An agent cannot effectively use this tool without guessing parameter semantics and expected behavior.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, meaning the description must explain parameter meanings, but it does not mention any parameters beyond 'exact filters'. The agent has no information on how parameters like 'limit', 'collection', or 'include_historical' affect the search.

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 description clearly states the tool searches for SARIF/static-analysis findings with exact filters, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_code_intel_semantic and search_code_intel_text that likely perform semantic or text-based searches.

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 its siblings, nor are there any exclusions or prerequisites mentioned. The description lacks context for appropriate use.

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

Deploy Server