Skip to main content
Glama

validate_doc

Check markdown documents for compliance with category-specific rules before manual git commit. Returns critical warnings, warnings, or info issues.

Instructions

Validate a markdown document before committing it to the knowledge repo. Read-only.

    Does not write any files or modify the index. Not needed when using
    the write_*() tools — they validate internally. Use this only when
    you are writing raw markdown and committing it manually via git.

    Args:
        content: Full markdown content to validate
        category: Target category — one of: "architecture", "api",
                  "bugfix", "best-practice", "setup", "changelog", "test", "docs"
        project: Target project name (optional)

    Returns:
        "OK" if the document passes all checks, or a list of issues
        tagged [!] critical (blocks indexing), [~] warning, [i] info.
    

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contentYes
projectNo
categoryNodocs

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior5/5

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

Declares read-only behavior and explicitly states it does not write files or modify the index. This is beyond what annotations (none) provide, giving full transparency.

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?

Well-structured with a summary line, guidance section, parameter list, and return value. Slightly verbose but every sentence is informative.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's complexity and having an output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, parameters, and return values completely. No gaps in essential information.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Despite 0% schema coverage, the description explains all three parameters: content as full markdown, category with a list of valid values, and project as optional name. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 validates a markdown document before committing it to the knowledge repo, distinguishing it from sibling tools like write_* that validate internally. The verb 'validate' and resource 'markdown document' are specific.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly states when to use (manual git commit) and when not (when using write_* tools), and names alternatives. This provides clear guidance on tool selection.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/dl4rce/flaiwheel'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server