Skip to main content
Glama
kushkillerjsixx66

canonical-vault-mcp-server

Search Vault Files

vault_search_files
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search file names and contents in the canonical-vault repo using GitHub code search qualifiers to locate specific files or mentions. Returns matching file paths and URLs for quick access.

Instructions

Search file names and contents across the canonical-vault repository (kushkillerjsixx66/canonical-vault) using GitHub code search.

Args:

  • query (string): Search terms. Supports GitHub code search qualifiers like 'path:governance' or 'extension:md'

  • limit (number): Max results, 1-50 (default: 20)

  • offset (number): Results to skip for pagination (default: 0)

  • response_format ('markdown' | 'json'): Output format (default: 'markdown')

Returns: For JSON format: { "total": number, "count": number, "results": [{ "path": string, "url": string }], "has_more": boolean }

Examples:

  • Use when: "Where is Coherence defined?" -> query="Coherence path:governance"

  • Use when: "Find every mention of vara.py" -> query="vara.py"

  • Don't use when: You already know the exact path (use vault_get_file instead)

Error Handling:

  • Returns "No files found matching ''" if the search returns empty

  • GitHub code search only indexes the default branch and repos under ~size limits; very new commits may lag briefly

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum results to return
queryYesSearch terms to match against file contents/names (GitHub code search syntax supported, e.g. 'invariant path:governance')
offsetNoNumber of results to skip for pagination
response_formatNoOutput format: 'markdown' for human-readable or 'json' for machine-readablemarkdown
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, etc.), the description discloses meaningful behavioral traits: GitHub code search limitations (only default branch, size limits, indexing lag), the exact error message when no results are found, and the return structure for JSON format. No contradictions with annotations exist.

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 well-structured with clear sections (Args, Returns, Examples, Error Handling) and is front-loaded with the core purpose. It repeats some schema details (like parameter defaults) but organizes them efficiently, and every sentence contributes useful information without being verbose or redundant.

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?

The description is complete for a search tool with pagination, multiple output formats, and external dependencies. It covers search syntax, pagination (offset), format handling, error messages, and known limitations. Since there is no output schema, it explicitly defines the JSON return structure, ensuring the agent knows exactly what to expect.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents each parameter. However, the description adds value beyond the schema by supplying practical examples (e.g., 'path:governance' qualifier), clarifying pagination behavior via offset, and specifying what each response_format yields. This extends the schema's dry definitions with actionable context.

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?

The description states a specific verb ('Search'), a clear resource ('file names and contents across the canonical-vault repository'), and the method ('using GitHub code search'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like vault_list_directory or vault_get_file, which serve different actions. The purpose is unambiguous and directly informs the agent when to invoke this tool.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description provides explicit 'Use when' and 'Don't use when' examples, including the exact condition for selecting an alternative (already knowing the exact path → use vault_get_file). It also gives concrete query examples and notes error handling, giving the agent clear decision criteria for when to apply this tool versus its siblings.

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/kushkillerjsixx66/canonical-vault-mcp-server'

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