mcp-skylos

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Assess codebase health

health_score

Read-only

Assess a project's risk, maintainability, dead code, security, and secrets, returning findings, coverage, and counts so you can prioritize fixes without a blended score.

Instructions

Assess a project through separate Risk, Maintainability and Dead code readouts.

This tool retains its health_score name for compatibility but no longer creates a blended numeric grade. Gate policy remains independent. Returns assessment, coverage, finding counts and _run_id. Read-only and local. Advice is grouped by default; expand_advice=True includes every Advice record. Read _result_uri for the complete saved result.

Requires SKYLOS_API_KEY: this tool returns an authentication error unless the MCP server is started with SKYLOS_API_KEY set. Without a key only analyze works (5 calls/day). The local CLI needs no key: skylos verify <file> and skylos agent install-hooks.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`path`	Yes	Directory or file to scan. A relative path resolves against the MCP server's working directory.
`confidence`	No	Minimum confidence (0-100) for dead-code findings. Higher values report fewer, surer candidates; 60 is the CLI default.
`expand_advice`	No	Include every Advice record instead of rule-group counts; complete results are always available through _result_uri.
`exclude_folders`	No	Folder names to skip, e.g. ["migrations", "scripts"]. When given, this list replaces the default excludes (node_modules, .venv, build, dist and similar); omit it to keep the defaults.
`include_quality`	No	Include code-quality findings in the assessment.
`include_secrets`	No	Include hard-coded secret findings in the assessment.
`include_security`	No	Include security findings in the assessment.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv4.49.0Oct 14, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, and the description adds real value on top: the API-key prerequisite and its failure mode, the fact that gate policy is independent of the score, and the _result_uri pointer for the full saved result. Only the auth-exception behavior is described; no rate limits beyond the 5 calls/day for the sibling are given.

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 purpose and compatibility note are front-loaded well, but the closing CLI tangent ('The local CLI needs no key: skylos verify...') is out of scope for an MCP tool definition and dilutes the message. The dense multi-clause sentences require re-reading.

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?

For a 7-parameter read-only assessment tool with an output schema, the definition covers the prerequisites (API key), the semantics change (no blended grade), the result-access pointer (_result_uri) and expansion toggle. With the output schema carrying return details, nothing critical is missing beyond explicit sibling selection guidance.

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 description coverage is 100%, so every parameter (including expand_advice and confidence) is already documented by the schema, which sets the baseline at 3. The description restates expand_advice's default/expansion behavior without adding syntax or new meaning beyond the schema.

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 gives a specific verb+resource ('Assess a project') and enumerates the three readouts (Risk, Maintainability, Dead code), and it clarifies the tool no longer produces a blended grade despite the legacy name. It distinguishes itself reasonably from generic siblings but never explicitly contrasts with analyze, quality_check, or security_scan, which are the closest candidates.

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?

It states an important gate ('Requires SKYLOS_API_KEY... Without a key only `analyze` works') which implicitly routes an unauthenticated agent to a sibling, but there is no explicit when-to-use-this-vs-quality_check/security_scan guidance. Usage is implied rather than stated.

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

Deploy Server