Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Tech Debt MCP Server

Tech Debt MCP Server

by viniciosrab
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

add_custom_rule

Define a custom regex-based tech debt rule to detect project-specific issues, with severity, category, message, and optional fix guidance.

Instructions

Add a custom pattern-based tech debt rule.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>",
      "pattern": "<pattern>",
      "message": "<message>",
      "severity": "<severity>",
      "category": "<category>"
    },
    "name": "add_custom_rule"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesUnique identifier for the rule
flagsNoOptional: regex flags (g, i, m, s, etc.)
messageYesIssue title/message
patternYesRegex pattern to match
categoryYesDebt category
severityYesIssue severity level
languagesNoOptional: apply only to specific languages
suggestionNoOptional: how to fix the issue

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.0.1

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 burden of disclosure. It implies a persistent mutation ('Add'), but says nothing about whether the rule is saved permanently, whether the regex is validated on creation, whether duplicate ids are rejected, or what errors look like. For a write operation with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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?

It is a single front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. Its brevity is clean, though it borders on under-specification rather than true economy.

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 an 8-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, one sentence is not enough. The description does not explain persistence, validation behavior, id uniqueness, or the create-then-execute workflow with execute_custom_rules, leaving the agent to guess at the operational contract.

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%, with every parameter described in the schema including the two enums, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds nothing beyond the schema; 'pattern-based' merely restates the schema's 'Regex pattern to match' and does not clarify the five required fields or the optional flags/languages/suggestion fields.

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 names a specific verb and resource: 'Add a custom pattern-based tech debt rule.' That is clearly distinct from sibling operations like remove_custom_rule, list_custom_rules, and execute_custom_rules. It does not explicitly contrast itself with those siblings, but the purpose is unambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no mention of prerequisites such as validating a regex with validate_custom_pattern first, and no statement of what happens when a rule with the same id already exists. The agent must infer the entire workflow.

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