Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
guardvibe

guardvibe

by goklab
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

security_workflow

Returns the recommended GuardVibe tool sequence for a given task, including which tools to call, their order, and parameters. Use it when you need guidance on the next security step.

Instructions

Get the recommended GuardVibe tool sequence for your current task. Returns which tools to call, in what order, and with what parameters. Use this when unsure which tool to use. Example: security_workflow({task: 'pre_commit'})

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": {
      "task": "<task>"
    },
    "name": "security_workflow"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
taskYesCurrent task: writing_code (after edits), pre_commit (before commit), pr_review (reviewing PR), new_project (initial setup), fix_vulnerabilities (fixing known issues), compliance_mapping (audit against framework), dependency_check (check deps), merge_to_main (pre-merge gate), publish_package (pre-publish checks), security_audit (comprehensive audit), incident_response (post-breach investigation), full_remediation (fix ALL security issues across all 6 sections — secrets, code, deps, config, taint, auth)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv3.66.0
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. Addedv3.0.42

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the return shape (an ordered tool sequence with parameters), which tells the agent this is advisory. However, it never states that it performs no scanning itself, whether the recommendation is static or state-dependent, or what happens if the agent deviates from the sequence — the things an agent most needs to know for a router tool.

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?

Three short sentences: what it returns, when to use it, and a concrete example — front-loaded with zero waste. The example earns its place by demonstrating invocation, not padding.

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 single-parameter router with a fully documented enum and no output schema, the description is nearly sufficient — the agent knows what it gets back and when to ask. The remaining gap is that its advisory, non-executing nature and the presence of the direct-execution siblings are implied rather than stated.

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?

The single `task` parameter has 100% schema description coverage including a 12-value enum with per-value parenthetical guidance, so the schema already does the heavy lifting. The description adds an illustrative valid value ('pre_commit') and the framing 'your current task', but contributes no semantics beyond the enum documentation.

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 ('Get the recommended GuardVibe tool sequence') and explicitly names the payload: which tools, in what order, with what parameters. This cleanly distinguishes it from the ~38 sibling scanning/fixing tools, which do the actual work rather than route.

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?

'Use this when unsure which tool to use' gives a clear positive trigger, and the example call shows the invocation shape. It stops short of an exclusion (e.g. 'skip this if you already know the right tool'), so an agent must infer that it is a fallback rather than a mandatory first step for every request.

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