Skip to main content
Glama

debug

Debug Go packages by starting the Delve debugger to trace and analyze code execution, with options for specifying packages and build flags.

Instructions

Start debugging a Go package

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
packageNoPackage to debug (defaults to current directory)
buildFlagsNoBuild flags to pass to the compiler

Implementation Reference

  • Core handler logic for the 'debug' tool: parses arguments, starts a Delve debug session for the specified Go package, and returns session info.
    case "debug": {
      const pkg = (args?.package as string) || ".";
      const buildFlags = args?.buildFlags as string | undefined;
      const cmdArgs: string[] = [];
      
      if (buildFlags) {
        cmdArgs.push("--build-flags", buildFlags);
      }
    
      const session = await startDebugSession("debug", pkg, cmdArgs);
      return {
        content: [{
          type: "text",
          text: `Started debug session ${session.id} for package ${pkg}`
        }]
      };
    }
  • Tool schema registration for 'debug': defines name, description, and input schema with optional 'package' and 'buildFlags' parameters.
    {
      name: "debug",
      description: "Start debugging a Go package",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          package: {
            type: "string",
            description: "Package to debug (defaults to current directory)"
          },
          buildFlags: {
            type: "string",
            description: "Build flags to pass to the compiler"
          }
        }
      }
    },
  • src/server.ts:406-408 (registration)
    MCP CallToolRequest handler that registers and routes the 'debug' tool invocation to handleDebugCommands.
    if (["debug", "attach", "exec", "test", "core", "dap", "replay", "trace"].includes(name)) {
      return handleDebugCommands(name, args);
    }
  • Type definition for DebugSession used by the 'debug' tool implementation.
    export interface DebugSession {
      id: string;
      type: string; // 'debug' | 'attach' | 'exec' | 'test' | 'core' | 'replay' | 'trace' | 'dap'
      target: string;
      process?: ChildProcess;
      port: number;
      breakpoints: Map<number, Breakpoint>;
      logOutput?: string[];
      backend?: string;
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states this 'starts' debugging but doesn't describe what that entails - whether it launches a process, attaches a debugger, requires specific permissions, has side effects, or what the expected output/behavior is. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that presumably initiates a debugging session.

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 a single, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and appropriately sized for a simple debugging initiation tool.

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?

For a debugging tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what 'debugging' entails in this context, what happens after debugging starts, whether there are prerequisites, or what the user should expect. Given the complexity of debugging operations and lack of structured metadata, more context is needed.

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 the schema already documents both parameters thoroughly. The description doesn't add any additional semantic context about parameters beyond what's in the schema descriptions (default behavior for package, purpose of buildFlags). Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 action ('Start debugging') and target resource ('a Go package'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like 'attach' or 'step', but the verb 'Start' implies initialization rather than continuation or attachment operations.

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 is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'attach' (for attaching to an existing process) or 'test' (for debugging tests). The description implies this is for initializing debugging but doesn't specify prerequisites or contextual constraints.

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/dwisiswant0/delve-mcp'

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