Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
cohors

cohors

by rushirb2001
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

Repository path

repo_path
Read-onlyIdempotent

Resolve a repository by ID, name, or path to its absolute path so you can operate in it directly. Use this instead of searching the filesystem for where it lives.

Instructions

Resolve a repo (by id, name, or path) to its absolute path so you can operate in it directly. Prefer this over searching the filesystem for where a repo lives.

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": {
      "repo": "<repo>"
    },
    "name": "repo_path"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
repoYesRepo id, name/alias, or path.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds only that the output is an absolute path, and says nothing about behavior when the repo cannot be resolved (error vs. nearest match) or whether existence is verified.

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 with zero filler: the purpose and result are front-loaded, and the disambiguation sentence follows immediately. Every clause earns its place.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a one-parameter, non-destructive resolver with no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns (an absolute path) and how to obtain it, which is nearly everything an agent needs. The remaining gap is failure/ambiguity behavior, a minor omission at this complexity level.

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%, so the single 'repo' parameter is already documented as an id, name/alias, or path. The description repeats that same enumeration ('by id, name, or path') without adding format hints, precedence rules, or what happens with an ambiguous name, so it adds no meaning beyond the schema.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Resolve a repo') and states the concrete result ('to its absolute path'), so the agent knows exactly what comes back. It does not, however, distinguish this from the sibling get_repo, leaving ambiguity about which resolution-style tool to pick.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives an explicit preference rule — use this rather than searching the filesystem for a repo location — which is real when-to-use guidance. It stops short of stating exclusions or how it relates to siblings like get_repo or list_repos, so it is clear context without full routing logic.

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