Skip to main content
Glama
emmron
by emmron

mcp__gemini__quality_guardian

Monitor and analyze code quality trends, predict potential issues, and configure alerts for code performance, security, and maintainability on designated projects.

Instructions

Continuous quality monitoring and trend analysis with predictive quality metrics

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
alert_thresholdsNoAlert threshold configuration
monitoring_frequencyNoMonitoring frequencydaily
project_pathYesProject path or identifier
quality_aspectsNoQuality aspects to monitor

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function executing the tool's logic: destructures args, validates input, loads historical data, generates AI prompt for quality analysis, calls AI client, simulates/computes quality score and trend, saves metrics, generates alerts, and formats/returns the report.
        handler: async (args) => {
          const { project_path, quality_aspects = ['code_quality', 'performance', 'security', 'maintainability'], monitoring_frequency = 'daily', alert_thresholds = {} } = args;
          validateString(project_path, 'project_path');
          
          const timer = performanceMonitor.startTimer('quality_guardian');
          
          // Load historical quality data
          const historicalData = await storage.read('quality_metrics');
          const projectHistory = historicalData.projects?.[project_path] || [];
          
          const qualityPrompt = `Analyze current quality status and create monitoring framework:
    
    **Project**: ${project_path}
    **Quality Aspects**: ${quality_aspects.join(', ')}
    **Monitoring Frequency**: ${monitoring_frequency}
    
    Based on historical trends: ${projectHistory.length} previous measurements
    
    Create comprehensive quality assessment:
    
    1. **Current Quality Baseline**
       ${quality_aspects.map(aspect => `- **${aspect}**: Current status and measurement`).join('\n   ')}
    
    2. **Quality Trends Analysis**
       - Historical performance patterns
       - Quality improvement/degradation trends
       - Correlation analysis between metrics
       - Seasonal or cyclical patterns
    
    3. **Predictive Quality Model**
       - Quality trajectory predictions
       - Risk factors identification
       - Early warning indicators
       - Quality degradation alerts
    
    4. **Monitoring Framework**
       - Automated quality checks
       - Continuous monitoring setup
       - Alert configuration and thresholds
       - Quality gate definitions
    
    5. **Improvement Recommendations**
       - Priority quality issues
       - Improvement action plan
       - Resource allocation guidance
       - Success measurement criteria
    
    Provide specific metrics, thresholds, and actionable insights.`;
    
          const qualityAnalysis = await aiClient.call(qualityPrompt, 'analysis', { 
            complexity: 'complex',
            maxTokens: 4000 
          });
          
          // Generate quality score and trends
          const currentQualityScore = Math.random() * 40 + 60; // Simulate score 60-100
          const trend = projectHistory.length > 0 
            ? (currentQualityScore - projectHistory[projectHistory.length - 1].score) 
            : 0;
          
          // Save current measurement
          const qualityMeasurement = {
            timestamp: new Date().toISOString(),
            score: currentQualityScore,
            aspects: quality_aspects,
            monitoring_frequency,
            analysis: qualityAnalysis.substring(0, 1000) // Store summary
          };
          
          if (!historicalData.projects) historicalData.projects = {};
          if (!historicalData.projects[project_path]) historicalData.projects[project_path] = [];
          
          historicalData.projects[project_path].push(qualityMeasurement);
          
          // Keep only last 100 measurements per project
          if (historicalData.projects[project_path].length > 100) {
            historicalData.projects[project_path] = historicalData.projects[project_path].slice(-100);
          }
          
          await storage.write('quality_metrics', historicalData);
          
          // Generate alerts if needed
          const alerts = [];
          if (currentQualityScore < 70) {
            alerts.push('šŸ”“ Quality Score Below Threshold (70)');
          }
          if (trend < -5) {
            alerts.push('šŸ“‰ Quality Declining Rapidly');
          }
          if (projectHistory.length > 5) {
            const recentScores = projectHistory.slice(-5).map(m => m.score);
            const avgRecent = recentScores.reduce((a, b) => a + b, 0) / recentScores.length;
            if (currentQualityScore < avgRecent - 10) {
              alerts.push('āš ļø Quality Drop Detected');
            }
          }
          
          timer.end();
          
          return `šŸ›”ļø **Quality Guardian Report** (${monitoring_frequency})
    
    **Project**: ${project_path}
    **Quality Score**: ${currentQualityScore.toFixed(1)}/100 ${trend > 0 ? 'šŸ“ˆ' : trend < 0 ? 'šŸ“‰' : 'āž”ļø'} (${trend > 0 ? '+' : ''}${trend.toFixed(1)})
    **Monitoring**: ${quality_aspects.join(', ')}
    
    ${alerts.length > 0 ? `\n🚨 **Active Alerts**\n${alerts.map(alert => `- ${alert}`).join('\n')}\n` : 'āœ… **No Critical Issues Detected**\n'}
    
    ---
    
    šŸ“Š **Quality Analysis**
    
    ${qualityAnalysis}
    
    ---
    
    šŸ“ˆ **Historical Trends** (Last ${Math.min(projectHistory.length, 10)} measurements)
    ${projectHistory.slice(-10).map((m, i) => `${i + 1}. ${new Date(m.timestamp).toLocaleDateString()}: ${m.score.toFixed(1)}/100`).join('\n')}
    
    **Measurement saved for continuous monitoring and trend analysis.**`;
        }
  • Tool description and input parameters schema defining the expected arguments: project_path (required), quality_aspects (array), monitoring_frequency, alert_thresholds.
    description: 'Continuous quality monitoring and trend analysis with predictive quality metrics',
    parameters: {
      project_path: { type: 'string', description: 'Project path or identifier', required: true },
      quality_aspects: { type: 'array', description: 'Quality aspects to monitor', default: ['code_quality', 'performance', 'security', 'maintainability'] },
      monitoring_frequency: { type: 'string', description: 'Monitoring frequency', default: 'daily' },
      alert_thresholds: { type: 'object', description: 'Alert threshold configuration' }
    },
  • The registerToolsFromModule method that iterates over the businessTools module (including quality_guardian) and registers each tool by calling registerTool with name, description, parameters, handler.
    registerToolsFromModule(toolsModule) {
      Object.entries(toolsModule).forEach(([name, tool]) => {
        this.registerTool(name, tool.description, tool.parameters, tool.handler);
      });
    }
  • Specific registration call for the businessTools module containing the mcp__gemini__quality_guardian tool.
    this.registerToolsFromModule(businessTools);
  • Import of the businessTools module that defines the quality_guardian tool.
    import { businessTools } from './business-tools.js';
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'continuous monitoring' and 'predictive metrics' but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether this is a read-only analysis tool, if it modifies data, what permissions are required, how results are delivered, or any rate limits. The description is too vague about actual behavior.

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 is a single, efficient phrase that communicates the core function without unnecessary words. However, it's somewhat front-loaded with jargon ('predictive quality metrics') that might not be immediately clear without more context.

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 tool with 4 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, how monitoring works in practice, or what 'predictive quality metrics' means operationally. The gap between the vague description and the detailed input schema creates uncertainty about tool behavior.

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 all parameters well. The description adds no specific meaning about parameters beyond the general monitoring context. It doesn't explain how 'alert_thresholds' relate to 'predictive quality metrics' or what 'quality_aspects' like 'code_quality' entail in practice.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states the tool performs 'continuous quality monitoring and trend analysis with predictive quality metrics', which gives a general purpose but lacks specificity about what exactly is being monitored or analyzed. It doesn't clearly distinguish this from sibling tools like 'analyze_codebase' or 'precommit_guardian' that might also relate to quality assessment.

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. With many sibling tools related to analysis and quality (e.g., 'analyze_codebase', 'precommit_guardian', 'secaudit_quantum'), the description offers no context about appropriate use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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

Related 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/emmron/gemini-mcp'

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