Skip to main content
Glama

audit_project

Returns a step-by-step project audit playbook covering static analysis, deep-fix loop, build/publish fallbacks, and strict UI testing to reach zero open findings and publish-ready status.

Instructions

Returns the multi-phase PROJECT AUDIT PLAYBOOK (instructions for the agent).

Strict mode is the default. Strict means EXHAUSTIVE — the agent does not stop until every finding is resolved, framework_bug (in framework_audit_results.md), or an active 🟢 ASK USER block awaiting user input. No finding stays open.

Two CLI flags (default ON in strict mode, both opt-out via --no-...):

  • --deep-fix: agent does NOT stop at first blocker (missing project key, auth-protected route, missing CLI subcommand). Surfaces ASK-USER blocks or runs documented fallbacks (e.g. publish blocked → local frank+brender preview).

  • --deep-framework-audit: every framework_bug entry includes a Read+Grep trace into smbls/ source identifying the suspected function, plus a suggested patch.

Two report files the CLI emits + the agent appends to:

  • audit/symbols_audit_results.md — PROJECT findings + resolutions

  • audit/framework_audit_results.md — FRAMEWORK bugs + repro + smbls/ trace + suggested patch (each entry must be debuggable by someone who's never seen the code; vague "doesn't work" entries are not acceptable in strict mode)

Findings have an origin field (project | framework | shared) classified by bin/symbols-audit heuristically, then refined by the agent during Phase 2.

This tool is a playbook getter, not an executor. The agent runs the playbook itself using:

  • get_project_context — call FIRST to resolve owner/key/env. Missing values surface as 🟢 ASK USER blocks (NEVER hardcoded).

  • bin/symbols-audit <symbols-dir> — deterministic regex sweep + dual-report template emission. Strict + deep modes default ON.

  • audit_component(code) — inline single-component validator (no filesystem).

  • chrome-mcp tools — for the Phase 3c local-vs-remote UI testing protocol.

Phase summary:

  • Phase 0: setup + baseline metrics + project-context resolution. Missing owner/key resolved here via ASK-USER (not deferred).

  • Phase 1: static audit via bin/symbols-audit (creates findings.json + symbols_audit_results.md + framework_audit_results.md templates).

  • Phase 2: fix loop with self-test. 3 failed fix attempts → finding becomes framework_bug with deep-audit trace. Continue, never stop on first bug.

  • Phase 3a: build gates with fallbacks for missing CLI subcommands.

  • Phase 3b: publish to staging WITH FALLBACK LADDER. If publish is blocked (missing key, AUTH_REQUIRED, env doesn't exist), agent surfaces ASK-USER AND/OR falls back to local frank to-json + brender + http.server preview so Phase 3c still has a viewable artifact. NEVER silently skip publish.

  • Phase 3c: STRICT UI testing — local-vs-(remote OR localfallback) side-by-side, click every clickable, icon rendering verification per Rule 62, theme/lang/ active-nav/forms/responsive.

  • Phase 4: iterate until two consecutive runs converge — zero open findings, zero pending ASK-USER, viewable artifact exists. Deep-fix loop re-visits framework_bug entries to strengthen them and retries blockers.

  • Phase 5: report = record of resolutions, NOT a TODO list. Strict mode forbids "Recommended follow-up tasks" as a terminal state.

Transport awareness: this playbook assumes stdio MCP transport (filesystem access). For SSE/HTTPS/CDN, the agent surfaces filesystem-dependent steps as shell commands the user runs locally, then resumes Phase 2/3 with pasted output. audit_component and audit_project are stateless and work over any transport; get_project_context and bin/symbols-audit are stdio-only.

Output artifacts created in /audit/: findings.json, symbols_audit_results.md (framework bugs), runs/, report.md.

Use this when the user asks to audit, validate, refactor for compliance, or 'make my project publish-ready in one shot'. Returns the entire playbook so the agent has the full context. Pair with the bundled bin/symbols-audit CLI for the deterministic regex pass.

Args: phase: 'all' (full playbook — default) | '0' | '1' | '2' | '3' | '4' | '5' (just one phase's section)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
phaseNoall

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and exceeds expectations. It discloses strict mode defaults, exhaustive behavior, deep-fix and deep-framework-audit flags, fallback ladders, transport awareness, output artifacts, phase specifics, and the rule that reports must not be TODO lists. No contradictions with annotations exist.

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?

The description is long, but well-structured with headers and bullets, and nearly every sentence delivers critical operational detail. It is front-loaded with the core purpose. Slight verbosity in repeated references to strict mode reduces the conciseness score, but the density is justified by the tool's complexity.

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

Completeness5/5

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

The description is exceptionally complete for a complex tool: it covers the full phase lifecycle, transport considerations, CLI companions, output artifacts, fallback behaviors, and parameters. No gaps in context remain for effective agent use.

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

Parameters5/5

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

The input schema has a single 'phase' parameter with schema description coverage of 0%, but the description fully compensates: 'Args: phase: "all" (full playbook — default) | "0" | "1" | "2" | "3" | "4" | "5" (just one phase's section)'. This adds complete meaning beyond the schema.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Returns the multi-phase PROJECT AUDIT PLAYBOOK (instructions for the agent).' It explicitly distinguishes itself from siblings by noting it is 'a playbook getter, not an executor' and references sibling tools like `audit_component` and `get_project_context` as complementary roles.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use this when the user asks to audit, validate, refactor for compliance, or "make my project publish-ready in one shot"'. It also gives alternatives and sequencing: 'get_project_context — call FIRST' and 'Pair with the bundled bin/symbols-audit CLI'. This clearly orients the agent among sibling tools.

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/symbo-ls/symbols-mcp'

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