Skip to main content
Glama
kevinlin

Spec-driven Development MCP Server

by kevinlin

spec_coding_execute_start

Initiate task execution in spec-driven development by providing guidance for implementing requirements through structured workflows.

Instructions

Start the task execution phase and provide guidance for task execution

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
session_idYesSession identifier
feature_nameYesFeature name
task_idNoOptional: Specify the task ID to execute; if not specified, the next unfinished task will be executed

Implementation Reference

  • The executeStart function that implements the core logic of the 'spec_coding_execute_start' tool. It reads an 'execute-task.md' template and constructs a markdown response with execution guidance, session info, and workflow progress.
    export async function executeStart(
      params: ExecuteStartParams
    ): Promise<string> {
      const { session_id, feature_name, task_id = 'next_uncompleted' } = params;
      console.error(`[MCP] Starting execution for feature: ${feature_name}, task: ${task_id}`);
      
      // 使用 execute-task.md 模板
      const template = await readTemplate('execute-task.md', {
        feature_name,
        session_id,
        task_id
      });
      
      return `# ⚙️ Task Execution Stage (5/5)
    
    ## Feature: ${feature_name}
    
    Congratulations! Now entering the final execution stage. Based on the completed requirements, design, and task planning, let's start executing development tasks one by one.
    
    ### Workflow Progress:
    - [x] 1. Goal Collection ✅
    - [x] 2. Requirements Gathering ✅
    - [x] 3. Design Documentation ✅
    - [x] 4. Task Planning ✅
    - [x] 5. **Task Execution** ← Current Stage
    
    ---
    
    ${template}
    
    ---
    
    **Session Information**:
    - Session ID: \`${session_id}\`
    - Feature Name: \`${feature_name}\`
    - Current Task: \`${task_id}\`
    - All Documents: ✅ Completed
    
    Now please start executing the development tasks!`;
    }
  • The JSON inputSchema definition for the tool, matching the ExecuteStartParams interface, requiring session_id and feature_name, with optional task_id.
    {
      name: 'spec_coding_execute_start',
      description: 'Start the task execution phase and provide guidance for task execution',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          session_id: { 
            type: 'string', 
            description: 'Session identifier' 
          },
          feature_name: { 
            type: 'string', 
            description: 'Feature name' 
          },
          task_id: { 
            type: 'string', 
            description: 'Optional: Specify the task ID to execute; if not specified, the next unfinished task will be executed' 
          }
        },
        required: ['session_id', 'feature_name']
      }
    }
  • src/server.ts:239-241 (registration)
    Registration in the tool call switch statement: dispatches calls to the executeStart handler.
    case 'spec_coding_execute_start':
      result = await executeStart(args as any);
      break;
  • src/server.ts:193-196 (registration)
    The ListTools handler returns the tools list including this tool's definition.
    server.setRequestHandler(ListToolsRequestSchema, async () => {
      console.error('[MCP] Handling list tools request');
      return { tools };
    });
  • TypeScript interface defining the input parameters, aligning with the tool's inputSchema.
    export interface ExecuteStartParams {
      session_id: string;
      feature_name: string;
      task_id?: 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 mentions 'start the task execution phase' and 'provide guidance,' but fails to specify what 'guidance' entails (e.g., instructions, prompts, or status updates), whether this is a read-only or mutative operation, potential side effects, or any constraints like rate limits. This leaves key behavioral traits undefined, making it inadequate for a tool with no annotation support.

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 concise with a single sentence that front-loads the core action ('Start the task execution phase') and adds a secondary function ('provide guidance for task execution'). It avoids unnecessary words, but could be more structured by clarifying the relationship between starting and providing guidance. Overall, it is efficiently sized, though slightly vague.

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 complexity implied by sibling tools in a workflow context, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on what 'guidance' includes, the expected outcome, error conditions, or how it fits into the broader workflow (e.g., after which sibling tools it should be used). This makes it insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's role and behavior fully.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with clear documentation for all three parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, as it does not explain parameter roles, interactions, or implications (e.g., how 'session_id' and 'feature_name' relate to starting execution). Since schema coverage is high, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the description does not compensate but also does not detract from the schema's information.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states the tool 'Start[s] the task execution phase and provide[s] guidance for task execution,' which gives a vague purpose. It mentions 'task execution phase' and 'guidance,' but lacks specificity about what resource is being acted upon (e.g., a session, feature, or task) and how it differs from sibling tools like 'spec_coding_tasks_start' or 'spec_coding_workflow_start.' This makes it unclear if it initiates execution, provides instructions, or both, without clear distinction from related tools.

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. With sibling tools like 'spec_coding_tasks_start' and 'spec_coding_workflow_start,' there is no indication of context, prerequisites, or exclusions. The input schema hints at usage through optional parameters (e.g., 'task_id' for specifying a task), but the description itself offers no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions, leaving usage ambiguous.

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/kevinlin/spec-driven-dev-mcp'

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