Skip to main content
Glama

get_file_approval_status

Check if a file has been approved for modification within the MCP Memory Server's safety workflow to prevent unauthorized changes.

Instructions

Get approval status for a file

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
filePathYesPath to the file

Implementation Reference

  • MCP tool handler for 'get_file_approval_status' that extracts the filePath argument, calls memoryManager.getFileApprovalStatus, and returns JSON-stringified result.
    case 'get_file_approval_status': {
      const filePath = args.filePath as string;
      const approval = await this.memoryManager.getFileApprovalStatus(filePath);
      return { content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(approval, null, 2) }] };
    }
  • src/index.ts:615-625 (registration)
    Registration of the 'get_file_approval_status' tool in the ListTools response, including input schema definition.
    {
      name: 'get_file_approval_status',
      description: 'Get approval status for a file',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          filePath: { type: 'string', description: 'Path to the file' }
        },
        required: ['filePath']
      }
    },
  • Core helper function implementing the logic to retrieve file approval status from project memory by relative path.
    async getFileApprovalStatus(filePath: string): Promise<ApprovalStatus | null> {
      const memory = await this.getProjectMemory();
      const relativePath = path.relative(this.projectRoot, filePath);
      return memory.approvalStates[relativePath] || null;
    }
  • TypeScript interface defining the ApprovalStatus structure used as return type for the tool.
    export interface ApprovalStatus {
      devApproved?: boolean;
      devApprovedBy?: string;
      devApprovedDate?: string;
      codeReviewApproved?: boolean;
      codeReviewApprovedBy?: string;
      codeReviewDate?: string;
      qaApproved?: boolean;
      qaApprovedBy?: string;
      qaApprovedDate?: string;
    }
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states what the tool does without detailing traits like whether it's read-only, requires authentication, has rate limits, or what the output format might be. This is inadequate for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and directly states the tool's purpose, making it highly concise and well-structured for quick understanding.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the approval status entails, potential return values, or error conditions. For a tool with no structured support, more context is needed to be fully helpful.

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%, with the parameter 'filePath' fully documented in the schema. The description does not add any meaning beyond the schema, such as examples or constraints on the file path. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema handles parameter documentation.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'approval status for a file', making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it does not distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'get_file_changelog' or 'get_file_last_editor', which also retrieve file-related information, so it lacks explicit differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions, such as whether it applies to specific file types or requires certain permissions. This leaves the agent without usage direction.

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/keleshteri/mcp-memory'

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