Skip to main content
Glama
gregordadera

aicb-roslyn-mcp

by gregordadera
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

List Code Insights

list_insights
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists code-quality and design-smell insights for a C# solution session to identify issues like long methods and fat interfaces, with triage filtering.

Instructions

List code-quality / async / design-smell insights for a session (long methods, fat interfaces, unused types, missing async suffixes, many-parameter methods, ...). Runs against the live analyzed solution; each insight is aggregated per producer with a Details list. Pass dbPath to use the active QualityProfile (producer thresholds + toggles) from that DB; omit it for the default profile (DB-free). Honors the session's active test-detection profile (resolved by analyze_solution(dbPath)) for the production-focused producers. An explicit analyze_solution(layerProfile) drives the layer-violation insight and wins over the DB-configured profile (same precedence as solution_metrics and the CLI gate). THIS ANSWER IS TRIAGE-FILTERED, on BOTH triage axes: findings the solution marked intentional (a suppression - in the DB or in the git-tracked .aicb.json sidecar) AND findings a user dismissed as seen (in the solution record, NOT in the sidecar) are removed, and an insight whose findings are all gone does not appear at all. Every insight that lost lines carries 'suppressed' with the count of what BOTH axes removed together (absent = nothing filtered), so a shrinking number is never mistaken for a codebase that improved - but do not read that count as a sidecar entry count, because some of it is dismissal. Note 'title' is producer text computed BEFORE filtering, so on a partially filtered insight it still names the pre-filter total - 'detailsCount' + 'suppressed' are the real split. 'remediationCostMinutes' is a coarse order-of-magnitude estimate from fixed per-finding rules, not measured effort.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dbPathNoOptional path to an AIContextBuilder SQLite DB. When set, producer thresholds + toggles come from that DB's active QualityProfile AND the configured default layer profile (DefaultLayerProfileName / per-solution) drives the layer-violation analysis (an explicit analyze_solution(layerProfile) wins). Omitted, the QualityProfile falls back to the server's default config DB (the GUI's, if resolved), else the default profile, and the layer profile to the config DB the session was analysed against - the one its renders read.
sessionIdYesThe session_id returned by analyze_solution. Also takes an absolute .sln/.slnx/.slnf path, analyzed on first use.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.5.46514
    • changedInput schema / properties / dbPath / description
      Previous value: -"Optional path to an AIContextBuilder SQLite DB. When set, producer thresholds + toggles come from that DB's active QualityProfile AND the configured default layer profile (DefaultLayerProfileName / per-solution) drives the layer-violation analysis (an explicit analyze_solution(layerProfile) wins); omit to fall back to the server's default config DB (the GUI's, if resolved), else the default profile + the explicit session layer profile."New value: +"Optional path to an AIContextBuilder SQLite DB. When set, producer thresholds + toggles come from that DB's active QualityProfile AND the configured default layer profile (DefaultLayerProfileName / per-solution) drives the layer-violation analysis (an explicit analyze_solution(layerProfile) wins). Omitted, the QualityProfile falls back to the server's default config DB (the GUI's, if resolved), else the default profile, and the layer profile to the config DB the session was analysed against - the one its renders read."
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.5.46513
    • changedInput schema / properties / sessionId / description
      Previous value: -"The session_id returned by analyze_solution."New value: +"The session_id returned by analyze_solution. Also takes an absolute .sln/.slnx/.slnf path, analyzed on first use."
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive annotations: it discloses that results are triage-filtered on BOTH axes (intentional suppressions and user dismissals), that fully-filtered insights disappear, how the 'suppressed' count combines both axes, and that 'title' is pre-filter producer text while detailsCount+suppressed is the real split. It also flags remediationCostMinutes as a coarse estimate. This is exactly the behavioral context annotations cannot carry.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Purpose is front-loaded, which is good, but the description is dense and winding — the triage-filtering and profile-precedence passages are convoluted and could be tightened. Given the tool's complexity most content earns its place, but the structure is heavier than it needs to be.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-shape burden and does reasonably well: it explains per-producer aggregation with a Details list and the meaning of suppressed, detailsCount, title, and remediationCostMinutes. A bit more on the overall shape would make it fully complete, but it is close.

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 both parameters are already documented in the schema, including dbPath's profile-resolution behavior. The description largely restates that precedence nuance rather than adding new syntax or format detail, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource with concrete scope: 'List code-quality / async / design-smell insights for a session', reinforced by named example categories (long methods, fat interfaces, unused types). It clearly reads as the list-side counterpart to get_insight, but it never explicitly differentiates itself from that sibling, so an agent still has to infer list-vs-single.

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?

Gives real conditional guidance for the dbPath parameter (pass to use the DB's QualityProfile, omit for the default DB-free profile) and explains precedence against analyze_solution(layerProfile). However, it offers no explicit when-to-use-this-vs-alternatives routing against siblings like get_insight or solution_metrics; usage is implied rather than directed.

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