Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Claude Code Starter Kit MCP

Claude Code Starter Kit MCP

by dachivadachkoria
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

command_detailed_review

Evaluate code with structured checklist and severity ratings to identify issues and improve quality.

Instructions

Structured code review with checklist and severity ratings

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": "command_detailed_review"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
argumentsNoOptional arguments for the tool (e.g. a file path or flags like --changed, --dry-run).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions the output format (checklist, severity ratings) but omits whether the tool is read-only, requires permissions, or has side effects.

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?

One sentence with no unnecessary words. Could be slightly more explicit but is efficient.

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?

No output schema and no details on checklist format, severity scale, or expected return values. Incomplete for a tool performing a complex code review.

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 the parameter 'arguments' is documented. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 performs a structured code review with a checklist and severity ratings, distinguishing it from generic code review or security-specific siblings.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives like agent_code_reviewer or command_security_check; lacking contextual usage hints.

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