Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Delx MCP Server

Delx MCP Server

by davidmosiah
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Regex Test

util_regex_test
Read-onlyIdempotent

Test a regex pattern against text, returning matches, capturing groups, and match count.

Instructions

Test a regex pattern against text. Returns matches, groups, and count. Delx Agent Utilities are separate from the free witness protocol and may expose x402 utility pricing.

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": {
      "pattern": "<pattern>",
      "text": "<text>"
    },
    "name": "util_regex_test"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textYesText to test against
flagsNoOptional flags: i=ignorecase, m=multiline, s=dotall
patternYesRegular expression pattern

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.8

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so safety profile is clear. The description adds that it returns matches, groups, and count, which is useful behavioral info beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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?

The description consists of two short sentences. The first is essential and clear. The second sentence about Delx utilities is somewhat extraneous but not verbose. Overall well-structured and front-loaded.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given no output schema, the description appropriately mentions return values (matches, groups, count). It also provides context about pricing model. For a simple regex testing tool, this is sufficiently 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with detailed descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Test a regex pattern against text' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying the tool's function, and the mention of returning matches, groups, and count adds clarity. No sibling tool does regex testing.

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. The sibling list includes many utilities but no regex alternative, so context helps, but explicit usage guidelines are absent.

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