Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ryns-code-mcp

ryns-code-mcp

by rayenking
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

Workspace Info

workspace_info

Retrieve workspace and runtime details to inspect the Linux environment and verify paths, context, and system configuration.

Instructions

Show workspace and runtime information.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "workspace_info"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.1

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and "show" only weakly implies a non-destructive read. It does not say whether the tool is side-effect free, whether it requires any setup, or — critically, since there is no output schema — what data it returns.

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?

A single short sentence with no padding, and the object of the operation is front-loaded. It is efficient but arguably under-specified rather than concise-in-a-good-way, since brevity here comes at the cost of content.

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?

The tool is simple (0 params, no nesting), but with no annotations and no output schema, the description is the only source of information about what comes back and it says nothing specific. For a discovery-style tool whose whole value is its return payload, that is a meaningful gap.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool takes zero parameters, so per the baseline the schema already fully specifies the call surface and the description has nothing extra to add. No parameter semantics gap exists.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"Show workspace and runtime information" does state a resource (workspace + runtime info), but the verb "show" is generic and "information" is unspecified — it merely restates the title "Workspace Info" with one added qualifier. An agent can guess this is a read-only introspection tool, but it cannot tell what fields (

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives among the 22 sibling tools. Nothing indicates whether this should be called at session start, or in what situation it beats list_directory/get_file_info for orientation.

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