Skip to main content
Glama
rodhayl
by rodhayl

mcp_diff_summarizer

Summarize code diffs into concise human-readable changes for easier code review and understanding of modifications.

Instructions

Summarize code diffs into concise human-readable changes.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
diffYesGit diff or unified diff content
formatNoOutput format (default: summary)

Implementation Reference

  • Implementation of the `explainDiff` method in `CodeAssistanceTools` class, which uses the `mcp_diff_summarizer` identifier for the tool call logic.
      /**
       * Explain code diff in plain language
       */
      async explainDiff(
        diff: string,
        options?: {
          context?: string;
        }
      ): Promise<ExplainDiffResult> {
        const prompt = `You are an expert at explaining code changes. Analyze this diff and explain what changed in plain English.
    ${options?.context ? `Context: ${options.context}` : ''}
    
    Provide your response as JSON:
    {
      "summary": "High-level summary of changes",
      "changes": [
        {
          "type": "added|removed|modified",
          "description": "What was changed",
          "impact": "Why this change matters"
        }
      ],
      "risks": ["Any potential risks or concerns"]
    }`;
    
        try {
          const responseText = await this.llmWrapper.callToolLlm(
            'mcp_diff_summarizer',
            [
              { role: 'system', content: prompt },
              { role: 'user', content: diff },
            ],
            { type: 'explain_diff' }
          );
    
          const parsed = this.parseJsonResponse(responseText, {
            summary: responseText,
            changes: [],
          });
    
          return {
            success: true,
            summary: parsed.summary || '',
            changes: parsed.changes || [],
            risks: parsed.risks,
          };
        } catch (error) {
          return {
            success: false,
            summary: '',
            changes: [],
            error: error instanceof Error ? error.message : 'Unknown error',
          };
        }
      }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full disclosure burden. It only mentions output style ('concise human-readable') but omits critical behavioral traits: read-only nature, size limitations for diffs, performance characteristics, error handling for malformed diffs, and whether this utilizes AI inference or rule-based processing.

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?

Single sentence of seven words is efficiently front-loaded with no redundancy. However, extreme brevity leaves insufficient room for behavioral disclosure and sibling differentiation given the lack of annotations and output schema.

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?

Core function is clear and input schema is comprehensive. However, lacking annotations, output schema, and sibling differentiation, the description minimally covers requirements for an AI agent to confidently select and invoke this tool in a multi-tool environment.

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 description coverage is 100%, establishing baseline 3. The description text adds no parameter-specific guidance beyond the schema (e.g., no elaboration on expected diff formats, size limits, or when to choose 'bullet' vs 'detailed' output).

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description uses specific verb 'Summarize' and resource 'code diffs' with clear scope. However, it fails to differentiate from sibling tool 'summarize' (general-purpose), leaving ambiguity about when to choose this specialized variant over the generic one.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'summarize', 'analyze_impact', or 'local_code_review'. The description lacks prerequisites (e.g., requiring valid diff format) and exclusions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/rodhayl/mcpLocalHelper'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server