Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
create-starter

create-starter

by starter-series
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

audit_security

Audit a local repository for security CI hygiene, checking gitleaks, CodeQL, dependency audits, license compliance, Dependabot, and secret scanning. Ensures alignment with the Starter Series quality bar.

Instructions

Audit a local repo for baseline security CI hygiene against the Starter Series quality bar: gitleaks, CodeQL, dependency audit, license check, --ignore-scripts, Dependabot, secret-scanning hints, claude-code-security-review Action, and claude-security-guidance.md. Read-only.

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": "audit_security"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathNoPath to the repo to audit (default: the MCP server's cwd). Use the absolute path of the project the user is working in.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
checksYes
overallYes
summaryYes
repoPathYes
ecosystemYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Explicitly states 'Read-only' and enumerates the specific checks performed, providing behavioral context despite no annotations. Does not mention potential side effects, but read-only covers the main risk.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the audit target, then lists checks, and ends with read-only. No wasted words.

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?

Covers the tool's purpose, scope, and read-only nature; output schema exists for return details. For a single-parameter read-only audit, this is adequate.

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?

Input schema fully documents the single 'path' parameter with default and usage guidance; description adds no param details beyond schema coverage.

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?

Clearly states it audits a local repo for baseline security CI hygiene, listing specific checks (gitleaks, CodeQL, etc.). Distinguishes from sibling audit tools (audit_release, audit_cd, audit_instructions) via the security focus.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Implies usage for security CI hygiene validation against the Starter Series quality bar, but does not explicitly state when to use this over siblings or provide exclusion criteria.

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