Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
npm-mcp

npm-mcp

by mikusnuz
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

query

Query installed npm packages using CSS-like selectors to filter dependencies by type (e.g., production, dev) within a specified package directory.

Instructions

Query installed packages using CSS-like selectors

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "path": "<path>",
      "selector": "<selector>"
    },
    "name": "query"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYesAbsolute path to the package directory
selectorYesCSS-like dependency selector (e.g. ':root > .prod', '.dev', '#lodash')

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.2.1

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden. 'Query' implies a read operation, but no details on side effects, permissions, error handling, or output format are given. The description lacks transparency beyond the basic action.

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 very concise at one sentence. It is front-loaded with the core purpose. However, it could include a bit more detail without sacrificing conciseness.

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 absence of annotations and output schema, the description should provide more context about what the query returns (e.g., list of dependency names, versions, or full dependency tree). It also does not mention that the path must point to a valid npm package directory. The description is incomplete for safe and correct usage.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value by hinting at the selector format ('CSS-like'), but does not explain the path parameter semantics beyond what the schema already states. No additional meaning is provided for either parameter.

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 clearly states the verb 'Query' and the resource 'installed packages', and specifies the mechanism 'CSS-like selectors'. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like 'ls' (list packages) and 'search' (search registry) by its unique selector functionality.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'ls', 'search', or 'view'. The description does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or when not to use it.

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