Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
SonarLint MCP Server

SonarLint MCP Server

by nielspeter
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

fix_all_issues

Automatically apply all SonarLint quick fixes to code quality issues in a file. Returns fixed issues and those requiring manual resolution.

Instructions

Automatically fix all code quality issues in a file that have available quick fixes. Applies all SonarLint-suggested fixes in one operation. Returns what was fixed and what remains (some issues require manual fixes like reducing complexity).

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": {
      "filePath": "<filePath>"
    },
    "name": "fix_all_issues"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
filePathYesAbsolute path to the file to fix

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.5.5

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Without annotations, description covers effects (applies fixes), return info (what fixed/remains), and limitation (manual fixes needed). Lacks details on undo or permissions, but adequate.

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?

Three sentences, no fluff, main purpose first, each sentence adds value.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple tool with one param and no output schema, description covers key aspects: what it does, how, and limitations. Could mention if it commits changes, but not necessary.

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 coverage is 100%, description adds no extra meaning to the filePath parameter beyond what the schema provides.

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 it fixes all code quality issues with available quick fixes in a file, using SonarLint. It distinguishes from sibling fix_issue by targeting all issues at once.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Implies when to use (bulk fix) and notes some issues require manual fixes, but lacks explicit when-not or alternative tools. Still provides enough context for an agent.

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