Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AgentCanon MCP

AgentCanon MCP

by touhi13
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

import_existing_rules

Creates a .agentcanon/rules.yaml file by importing existing AGENTS.md or CLAUDE.md rules, or generates a starter configuration when no rule files exist.

Instructions

Bootstraps .agentcanon/rules.yaml from existing AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, or creates a starter configuration.

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": "import_existing_rules"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectRootNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a write operation but never states whether an existing rules.yaml is overwritten, merged, or preserved, nor what the resulting file contains or what permissions/errors are involved — significant gaps for a file-creating mutation tool.

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?

A single efficient sentence that front-loads the action and target artifact. Every clause adds information about sources or fallback behavior; nothing is wasted.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented parameter, the description is thin for a mutation tool. It omits the critical behavior of what happens when rules.yaml already exists and where the file is written relative to projectRoot.

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

Parameters2/5

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

There is a single parameter (projectRoot) with 0% schema description coverage, and the description never references it. The name is suggestive but the description does not confirm it is the directory to scan for AGENTS.md/CLAUDE.md or where rules.yaml is written, so it fails to compensate for the schema gap.

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 gives a specific verb ('bootstraps'/'creates') and a clearly named resource (.agentcanon/rules.yaml) plus the source inputs (AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md). This is readily distinguishable from list_rules or upsert_rule, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied by 'bootstraps ... from existing' and 'creates a starter configuration', which suggests initial setup. However, there is no explicit when-to-use versus alternatives (e.g., upsert_rule for adding individual rules) and no statement of prerequisites or whether an existing rules.yaml is expected.

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