Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
agy-mcp

agy-mcp

by cyeezy08
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

agy_skill_lock_status

Read .skill-lock.json to list installed skill sources and versions. Returns version, each skill's name, source, source_type, and total count.

Instructions

Read the .skill-lock.json to see installed skill sources and versions.

Return Format

{"version": int, "skills": [{"name": str, "source": str, "source_type": str}], "count": int}

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": "agy_skill_lock_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ctxNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

There are no annotations to fall back on, but the description itself reveals that this is a read-only operation on a specific file and includes the expected return shape. It does not disclose behavior when the lock file is missing, malformed, or out of sync, so the transparency is adequate but not rich.

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 appropriately short, front-loads the main purpose, and adds a compact, useful return-format block. Every sentence contributes meaning and there is no filler.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple read-only status tool, the description covers the action, resource, and return format. However, it omits usage context relative to sibling tools, parameter semantics, and failure behavior, so it is not fully complete for an agent deciding among related skill-management tools.

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?

The only parameter, ctx, has zero schema description and is not mentioned in the tool description. The parameter is optional with a default of null, which lowers the impact, but with 0% schema coverage the description should still clarify its role.

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 verb 'Read' and the resource '.skill-lock.json', with an explicit purpose: seeing installed skill sources and versions. It is specific, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the similar sibling agy_list_skills, so it falls short of a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The phrase 'to see installed skill sources and versions' implies when the tool is useful. However, it gives no explicit guidance about when to prefer this tool over alternatives like agy_list_skills or agy_get_config, and it provides no exclusion criteria.

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