Skip to main content
Glama
theburgerllc

AI Development Pipeline MCP

by theburgerllc

run_project_tests

Execute project test suites (npm test, yarn test) to validate code functionality and identify issues during development.

Instructions

Run project tests (npm test, yarn test, etc.)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The complete inline implementation of the 'run_project_tests' tool handler. It registers the tool with no input parameters and executes 'npm test' using child_process.exec, returning the stdout or error message in MCP content format.
    server.tool(
      'run_project_tests',
      'Run project tests (npm test, yarn test, etc.)',
      {},
      async () => {
        return new Promise((resolve) => {
          exec('npm test', { cwd: process.cwd() }, (error, stdout, stderr) => {
            if (error) {
              resolve({
                content: [{ type: 'text', text: `Test error: ${stderr || error.message}` }]
              });
            } else {
              resolve({
                content: [{ type: 'text', text: stdout }]
              });
            }
          });
        });
      }
    );
  • Empty schema indicating the tool takes no input parameters.
    {},
  • Registration of the 'run_project_tests' tool using McpServer.tool method.
    server.tool(
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool runs tests but lacks details on execution context (e.g., in a specific directory, with environment variables), error handling, output format, or side effects. This is inadequate for a tool that performs an action with potential runtime implications.

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?

The description is extremely concise (one short sentence) and front-loaded with the core action. Every word earns its place by specifying the tool's function and providing examples without redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (executing tests, which can involve dependencies, environment setup, and output interpretation), the description is incomplete. With no annotations, no output schema, and minimal behavioral details, it fails to provide sufficient context for safe and effective use, especially compared to sibling tools that might overlap in functionality.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description doesn't add parameter details, which is appropriate here, but it could have mentioned implicit parameters (e.g., project context) to enhance clarity, though not required.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Run') and resource ('project tests'), and provides concrete examples (npm test, yarn test) that clarify the action. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'run_shell_command' or 'run_augment_prompt', which could also execute commands.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a project with test scripts), exclusions, or comparisons to sibling tools like 'run_shell_command' for general commands or 'run_augment_prompt' for other execution tasks.

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/theburgerllc/ai-development-pipeline-mcp'

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