did-it
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| DID_IT_WORKSPACE | No | Override the workspace directory the server audits. Defaults to the host workspace's process.cwd(). |
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": true
} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| verify_claimed_actionsA | Verify a list of claimed coding actions against the local Git working tree before reporting completion. Call this with every file you claim to have created, edited, deleted, or every package you claim to have installed. Ghost claims are a hard rejection: you must execute the missing work or admit failure before the user sees a completion summary. |
| inspect_actual_changesA | Return the raw list of files that are actually modified, created, deleted, or untracked in Git. Use this instead of guessing what changed. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: one inspects raw Git changes, the other verifies claimed actions against the working tree. No overlap or ambiguity; an agent can easily select the right tool.
Both tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: 'inspect_actual_changes' and 'verify_claimed_actions'. The verbs are descriptive and the structure is uniform.
With only 2 tools, the server feels minimal, but its purpose is narrowly scoped to Git verification. The two tools cover the core inspection and verification workflows, so the count is appropriate for the domain, though it edges toward thinness.
The tool surface fully covers the server's stated purpose of checking actual Git state and verifying claims against it. There are no obvious dead ends or missing operations for this verification-focused domain; it provides the essential inspect and verify capabilities.