TestHeal
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| OPENAI_API_KEY | No | Your OpenAI API key (used when OpenAI is the LLM provider) | |
| ANTHROPIC_API_KEY | No | Your Anthropic API key (used when Anthropic is the LLM provider) |
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| diagnose_test_failureA | Perform deep root-cause analysis of a failing test. Returns ranked hypotheses with confidence scores, evidence, and precise locations. Call this first when a test fails. Prefer this over guessing from the raw test output. |
| propose_minimal_fixA | Generate the smallest possible high-confidence patch for a diagnosed root cause. Always prefer minimal edits. Returns a unified diff, explanation, confidence, and risk level. Call diagnose_test_failure first when possible. |
| assess_fix_safetyA | Evaluate whether a proposed patch is likely to introduce regressions. Returns risk level, potential side effects, and a clear recommendation. Use before applying any non-trivial fix. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 3 tools
Each tool handles a distinct stage of a clear pipeline: diagnose, propose, assess. There is no overlap or ambiguity about which tool to call at each step.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: diagnose_test_failure, propose_minimal_fix, assess_fix_safety. The verbs clearly indicate distinct actions and the nouns describe the target artifact.
Three tools is on the smaller side, but each covers a necessary phase of the test-fix workflow. The count is reasonable for a focused MCP server, though slightly thin.
The tools cover the core diagnose-propose-assess lifecycle well. A minor gap is the lack of an explicit tool to apply or commit the fix, but that may be intentionally outside the server's scope.