Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
armorcode-mcp

armorcode-mcp

by raviraj-ntp
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Release Gate Status

armorcode_release_gate_status

Evaluate release gate status for specified product, sub-products, and environment to determine deployment approval.

Instructions

Check ArmorCode release gate (/client/build).

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": {
      "product": "<product>",
      "subProducts": "<subProducts>",
      "env": "<env>"
    },
    "name": "armorcode_release_gate_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
envYes
productYes
subProductsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Check', implying a read-only operation but without explicit safety guarantees. No side effects, rate limits, or auth needs are mentioned.

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?

The description is a single sentence with no extraneous words. It is front-loaded and efficiently conveys the core action.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given three required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what the returned status looks like, how to interpret results, or any additional context needed for effective use.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the tool description does not explain the three parameters (product, subProducts, env). The agent must infer meaning from parameter names alone, which is insufficient for accurate invocation.

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's action ('Check') and resource ('ArmorCode release gate (/client/build)'), making the purpose immediately obvious. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'armorcode_accept_risk' which perform different actions.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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, nor any conditions or exclusions. The agent receives no help in deciding whether to invoke this over sibling tools.

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