Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
CHECK-MODULE MCP Server

CHECK-MODULE MCP Server

by muhammedehab35
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

add-doc

Add or update internal documentation with titles, descriptions, Markdown content, categories, and tags.

Instructions

Add or update documentation. Stores a new document or updates an existing one.

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": {
      "id": "<id>",
      "title": "<title>",
      "description": "<description>",
      "content": "<content>",
      "category": "<category>",
      "tags": "<tags>"
    },
    "name": "add-doc"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesUnique document ID
titleYesDocument title
descriptionYesShort description
contentYesFull document content (supports Markdown)
categoryYesCategory (e.g., API, Database, DevOps)
tagsYesTags for categorization
versionNoOptional: Document version

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The description only says 'Stores a new document or updates an existing one,' but lacks details on whether updates are partial or full replacements, or any side effects. With no annotations, the description fails to provide sufficient behavioral context.

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 and front-loaded, but it is too brief to convey necessary detail. No wasted words, but could be expanded.

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 7 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain behavior on duplicate IDs, confirm creation vs update, or return type. More context is needed.

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 covers all 7 parameters with descriptions, so the description adds no additional semantic value. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool adds or updates documentation, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get-doc which only retrieve. However, it does not explicitly differentiate between the add and update behaviors.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives like search-docs or list-categories.

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