Skip to main content
Glama
theSharque
by theSharque

Validate Project

validate

Run validation checks on project architecture for data flow consistency, module-entry links, file integrity, and slice coverage, returning a compact report of issues to fix.

Instructions

Run after set-project-architecture, set-module-details, set-entry, or set-entries. Returns a compact report (summary, stats, issues by kind)—no need to load the full project in the agent. Checks only known rules: dataFlow consistency, module↔entry links, module detail files, entry index drift, empty api/domain/persistence slices, entry slice coverage, optional module-too-few-entries when moduleEntryMin is set. Fix issues[] then call validate again.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectIdNoProject ID (defaults to normalized workdir)
checkInverseNoCheck providesTo vs dependsOn inverse (default true)
checkModuleDepsNoCheck module.dependencies vs dataFlow.dependsOn (default true)
checkEntryCoverageNoCheck modules vs entries linkage (default true)
checkStorageNoCheck module files on disk and entry index drift (default true)
checkEmptySlicesNoWarn when api/domain/persistence slices have zero entries but modules exist (default true)
checkSliceCoverageNoCheck entries match at least one built-in or custom slice (default true)
checkModuleEntryCountsNoCheck module-too-few-entries when moduleEntryMin is set (default true)
moduleEntryMinNoMin entries per module when count > 0; omit to disable module-too-few-entries

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectIdYes
validYes
issueCountYes
summaryYes
statsYes
issuesByKindYes
issuesYes
coverageNo
checksRunYes
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses that it returns a compact report (summary, stats, issues by kind), lists all checks, and notes that it avoids loading the full project. Does not explicitly state read-only nature, but implied.

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 efficient, front-loading purpose and usage. It is slightly lengthy due to listing checks, but each sentence adds value. Could be more concise, but overall well-structured.

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?

Given the 9 parameters, output schema exists, and no annotations, the description adequately covers usage context, behavioral traits, and parameter roles. It provides sufficient guidance for correct invocation.

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?

All 9 parameters have full schema descriptions (100% coverage). The tool description adds context by listing the checks corresponding to boolean parameters and explaining moduleEntryMin, but does not significantly enhance the parameter semantics 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 validates a project after specific setup steps and returns a compact report. It lists the checks performed, differentiating it from sibling tools like validate-architecture and validate-import.

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?

Explicitly mentions when to run the tool (after set-project-architecture, etc.) and suggests iterative use ('Fix issues[] then call validate again'). Does not explicitly state when not to use it, but context is clear.

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/theSharque/mcp-architect'

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