fw-context-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

check_dependencies

Run a read-only dependency audit and return structured results with status, fix commands, and instructions for each issue.

Instructions

Run the full dependency audit. Read-only. Returns structured results.

Returns the raw per-check dicts (name, status, message, fix_cmd, instructions, critical) — NOT the formatted doctor table. Read status/fix_cmd/instructions per issue; status="skipped" means a prerequisite is missing.

Args: project_root: Project root directory. Auto-detected from CWD if omitted. project: Project name or project_id — call list_projects to get them. Use it to ask about a project that is not the project of the current directory. It is an alternative to project_root, which takes a root path. Give one of the two, not both.

Returns: list[dict]: one dict per check, DepCheckResult fields via asdict.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`project`	No	Project name or project_id — call list_projects to get them. Use it to ask about a project that is not the project of the current directory. It is an alternative to project_root, which takes a root path. Give one of the two, not both.
`project_root`	No	Project root. Auto-detected if omitted. Pass explicitly when the project is not the server cwd. This field also accepts a project name or a project_id, but project is the clear field for those.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv0.30.0Sep 5, 2026

addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```

addedInput schema / properties / project

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Project name or project_id — call list_projects to get them. Use it to ask about a project that is not the project of the current directory. It is an alternative to project_root, which takes a root path. Give one of the two, not both.",
+  "title": "Project"
+}

changedInput schema / properties / project_root / description

Previous value: -"Project root. Auto-detected if omitted. Pass explicitly when the project is not the server cwd."New value: +"Project root. Auto-detected if omitted. Pass explicitly when the project is not the server cwd. This field also accepts a project name or a project_id, but project is the clear field for those."

Addedv0.25.3Aug 16, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It explicitly declares 'Read-only,' describes the exact return shape, explains that 'status="skipped"' indicates a missing prerequisite, and clarifies the raw-versus-formatted result distinction. This is substantial behavioral disclosure, though it stops short of describing error behavior or potential delays.

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 well organized with a front-loaded summary, a prominent return-format warning, and clear Args/Returns sections. It is concise overall, though there is minor redundancy between the first paragraph listing the dict fields and the Returns section repeating 'DepCheckResult fields via asdict.'

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 an output schema exists and both parameters are fully documented in the schema, the description covers the essential additional context: read-only behavior, raw vs. formatted output, status interpretation, and parameter selection. It lacks edge-case guidance (e.g., what happens if both params are provided) but is complete enough for an agent to call it correctly in normal cases.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds useful context about mutual exclusivity ('Give one of the two, not both') and auto-detection of project_root from CWD, but the argument text closely mirrors what is already in the schema. It does not meaningfully compensate beyond the schema, so no higher score is warranted.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Run the full dependency audit.' It adds 'Read-only' and clarifies that it returns raw per-check dicts, not the formatted 'doctor' table, which distinguishes it from potential sibling tools like get_environment_status or check_ollama. The purpose is immediately recognizable and unambiguous.

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 context is implied: call this when you need a dependency audit. It gives guidance on choosing between 'project' and 'project_root' and refers to list_projects for project names, but it never explicitly names alternatives or says when NOT to use this tool. No sibling differentiation is provided, so the agent must infer selection from the purpose.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.