Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mindyard

mindyard

by floriantriclin
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Lint report

get_lint_report
Read-only

Retrieve a wiki's stored Markdown lint report to review broken links, orphan pages, frontmatter issues, and rule breaches before cleanup.

Instructions

Return the wiki's latest lint report, as Markdown.

The report lists broken links, orphan pages, frontmatter problems and breaches of the rules the wiki declares. It is written by the 'mindyard lint' command, not recomputed by this call, so it may predate recent edits. Use it to review a wiki's health or before a clean-up batch; when no report exists yet, a message says so.

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": {
      "wiki": "<wiki>"
    },
    "name": "get_lint_report"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
wikiYesWiki id, as returned by list_wikis.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.3
    • addedInput schema / properties / wiki / description
      Added value: +"Wiki id, as returned by list_wikis."
  2. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false), and the description adds context annotations cannot express: the report is produced by the external 'mindyard lint' command and is not recomputed, so it may be stale relative to recent edits. It also discloses the no-report case, which is exactly the kind of behavior an agent needs before trusting the output.

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?

Front-loaded with what the tool returns and in what format, then contents, then provenance/staleness, then usage. Each sentence carries distinct information with no filler or repetition of the schema.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no elaboration, yet the description still summarizes what the report contains and warns that it may be stale. For a single-parameter read tool this leaves no meaningful gap.

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?

There is one parameter at 100% schema description coverage, and the schema already says 'Wiki id, as returned by list_wikis'. The description adds nothing about the parameter itself, so the baseline of 3 applies rather than a higher score.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Return the wiki's latest lint report') plus the output format ('as Markdown'), then enumerates the report's contents (broken links, orphan pages, frontmatter problems, rule breaches). None of the sibling tools (list_pages, list_wikis, read_page, search_wiki, write_batch) could be confused with this, so the tool is identifiable without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives concrete when-to-use guidance: 'review a wiki's health or before a clean-up batch', and states the empty-state behavior ('when no report exists yet, a message says so'). It stops short of naming an alternative or an explicit when-not-to-use case, which keeps it from a 5.

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