Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
engineering-matrix-explorer

engineering-matrix-explorer

by officechbusinessservices-creator
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

search_engineering_matrix

Find the right engineering tool by searching its name, tag, or use case. Multi-word queries deliver targeted results.

Instructions

Search for engineering tools by name, tag, or use case. Supports multi-word queries.

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": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "search_engineering_matrix"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesSearch query e.g. 'python linter', 'react', 'ci cd'
categoryFilterNoOptional category id to restrict search
limitNoMax results (default 10)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.2

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior beyond the basic function. It only mentions the search fields and multi-word support, but does not specify behavior like case sensitivity, fuzzy matching, or pagination.

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?

Two short sentences are perfectly concise and front-loaded: the first states the core purpose, and the second adds a key detail. No wasted words.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The description is adequate for a simple search tool, but lacks details about the output format or how the category filter works. With no output schema, some additional context would be beneficial.

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%, with descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema examples, such as 'supports multi-word queries,' which is already implied by examples.

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 tool searches for engineering tools by name, tag, or use case, and supports multi-word queries. It distinguishes this search tool from siblings that deal with boilerplate code or category listings.

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, such as when to use list_categories instead. It only states what the tool does.

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