arale-code
OfficialServer Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
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
} |
| logging | {} |
| prompts | {
"listChanged": true
} |
| resources | {
"subscribe": false,
"listChanged": true
} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| list_instructionsA | List valid engineering-instruction IDs and their resource URIs. Call this before requesting an instruction when the ID is not already known. |
| list_proceduresA | List the Arale control guide and procedures with their IDs and resource URIs. Call this before reading a procedure when the ID is not already known. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| apply_instruction | Produce a reusable user message that directs an agent to apply one document. |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| instruction-catalog | Application-driven, read-only discovery of the full manifest. |
| arale-catalog | Application-driven, read-only discovery of the procedure manifest. |
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
The two tools are mostly distinct: one lists procedures/control-guide entries and the other lists engineering-instruction IDs. They share a very similar list-by-ID/URI pattern, but the descriptions make the resource type clear enough to avoid most confusion.
Both tools follow the same predictable list_noun convention. There are no naming inconsistencies across the set.
Two tools is thin for a server surface, and both only list identifiers rather than offering broader procedure/instruction interaction. The count is borderline rather than clearly wrong, but it feels under-scoped.
The surface only lists procedure and instruction IDs/URIs; there are no tools to actually read, fetch, or operate on a procedure or instruction. Descriptions imply later reading/requesting, but the tool set does not provide those operations, creating a significant dead end.