Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Specky

Specky

by gbb-acelerators
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Run Compliance Check

sdd_compliance_check
Read-onlyIdempotent

Validates specification and design against HIPAA, SOC2, GDPR, PCI-DSS, ISO27001, or general compliance frameworks and writes COMPLIANCE.md.

Instructions

Validates specification and design against a compliance framework (HIPAA, SOC2, GDPR, PCI-DSS, ISO27001, or general). Writes COMPLIANCE.md.

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": {
      "framework": "<framework>"
    },
    "name": "sdd_compliance_check"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
spec_dirNoSpec directory path (relative to workspace root).specs
frameworkYesCompliance framework to validate against
feature_numberNoFeature number (zero-padded, e.g. '001')001

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv3.4.0-rc.14

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

The description states the tool writes COMPLIANCE.md, which contradicts the annotation readOnlyHint=true. This is a serious inconsistency, as a write operation cannot be read-only.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the key action and scope. It is efficient but could be slightly more structured without adding length.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The description covers the main action but does not explain the return value, error handling, or prerequisites (e.g., existence of spec files). Given the absence of an output schema, more information would be beneficial.

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%, and the description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides for each parameter. The baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 explicitly states the tool validates specification and design against specified compliance frameworks and writes a COMPLIANCE.md file. This clearly distinguishes it from other sibling tools like generic validation or generation tools.

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?

The description implies usage for compliance checking but does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or when not to use it.

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