Skip to main content
Glama

argus_pr_validate

Audit only routes changed by a GitHub pull request, using the PR diff to target affected areas and return findings for CI merge gates.

Instructions

Runs a targeted Argus audit on the routes affected by a GitHub pull request. Fetches the PR diff, maps changed files to routes in your target config using path-slug heuristics (infrastructure changes trigger a full audit; targeted otherwise), and audits only those routes — faster than a full scan and focused on what the PR actually touched. Returns { findings, affectedRoutes, changedFiles, perRoute, summary, blocked, blockOn }. Use in CI to gate merges: check blocked:true or pipe findings to an AI verdict step. Requires Chrome on --remote-debugging-port=9222. GITHUB_TOKEN env var recommended for private repos.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
prUrlYesFull GitHub PR URL (e.g. https://github.com/owner/repo/pull/42). Used to fetch the list of changed files via the GitHub REST API.
targetUrlNoBase URL to audit (e.g. https://staging.example.com). Overrides TARGET_DEV_URL env var.
githubTokenNoGitHub Personal Access Token or workflow GITHUB_TOKEN. Optional for public repos. Falls back to GITHUB_TOKEN env var.
blockOnNo"critical" = block only when critical findings exist. "warning" = block on any warning or critical. "none" = never block. Defaults to ARGUS_BLOCK_ON env var, then "critical".critical
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, description fully discloses behavior: fetches PR diff, maps changed files, uses heuristics, returns specific structure, requires Chrome, token handling. Lacks details on error handling or rate limits but is comprehensive overall.

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?

Single-paragraph description is dense but efficient; front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence adds value. Could be slightly restructured for readability but remains concise.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, description fully covers input, behavior, output structure (return fields), prerequisites (Chrome, token), and integrated usage (CI, blocking). No gaps identified.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

All 4 parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage). Description adds value: explains blockOn enum meanings and defaults, fallback behavior for githubToken, and usage context for targetUrl. Not exceptional but solid.

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?

Description clearly states it runs a targeted Argus audit on PR-affected routes, specifying action verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes from siblings by contrasting targeted vs full audit and mentioning CI/blocking behavior.

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?

Explicitly recommends CI usage for gating merges and implies when to use (targeted PR-focused) vs full scans. Does not directly mention sibling alternatives but context is clear. Could be more explicit about when not to use.

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

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/ironclawdevs27/Argus'

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