Skip to main content
Glama
timohaa

Scopewalker MCP

by timohaa
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

get_code_smells

Detect code smells such as TODO, FIXME, HACK, BUG markers, and unsafe casts in a target path. Apply filters for smell types, extensions, depth, and file limits to pinpoint problem areas.

Instructions

Finds TODO/FIXME/HACK/BUG markers and unsafe casts in code.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYesTarget path
limitNoMax results
typesNoSmell types to detect
max_depthNoMax depth
max_filesNoMax files to scan
extensionsNoFilter by extensions
include_textNoInclude comment text
include_hiddenNoInclude hidden
ignore_patternsNoExclude patterns

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed8 schema fields changedv1.3.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / extensions / items / maxLength
      Added value: +32
    • addedInput schema / properties / extensions / items / pattern
      Added value: +"^\\.?[A-Za-z0-9_+-]+$"
    • addedInput schema / properties / extensions / maxItems
      Added value: +100
    • addedInput schema / properties / ignore_patterns / items / maxLength
      Added value: +512
    • addedInput schema / properties / ignore_patterns / maxItems
      Added value: +100
    • changedInput schema / properties / limit / maximum
      Previous value: -9007199254740991New value: +5000
    • changedInput schema / properties / max_depth / maximum
      Previous value: -9007199254740991New value: +64
    • changedInput schema / properties / max_files / maximum
      Previous value: -9007199254740991New value: +10000
  2. First observedv1.0.4

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says the tool 'Finds...' and gives no details on traversal, default scope, whether hidden/ignored files are included, or what the result shape is. 'Finds' weakly implies a read-only scan, but that is not made explicit.

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?

A single compact sentence with no filler; the core artifact types are front-loaded before the location phrase. It earns its place even though more behavioral detail is missing.

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?

For a 9-parameter scan tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is too thin: it omits return format, default limit/depth behavior, and guidance on selecting between this and find_dead_code or get_complexity_metrics. The schema documents parameters but nothing about result semantics.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents every parameter. The description's mention of TODO/FIXME markers doubles the 'types' enum, adding marginal semantic color but no new syntax, defaults, or constraints.

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 names a specific verb+resource ('Finds ... markers and unsafe casts in code') and enumerates concrete artifact types (TODO/FIXME/HACK/BUG, unsafe casts). This clearly differentiates it from sibling analysis tools like get_line_counts, find_dead_code, and get_complexity_metrics.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of alternatives among the sibling tools. An agent must infer that this is for code-quality inspection rather than, say, dead code or complexity analysis.

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