Skip to main content
Glama
wfengq

artifactdiff-mcp

by wfengq

Server Configuration

Describes the environment variables required to run the server.

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ARTIFACTDIFF_MCP_INPUT_ROOTSNoAbsolute, path-separator-delimited root directories for MCP input (contracts).
ARTIFACTDIFF_MCP_OUTPUT_ROOTSNoAbsolute, path-separator-delimited root directories for MCP output (review bundles).

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

CapabilityDetails
tools
{
  "listChanged": false
}
prompts
{
  "listChanged": false
}
resources
{
  "subscribe": false,
  "listChanged": false
}
experimental
{}

Tools

Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions

NameDescription
compare_documentsD
inspect_documentD
inspect_contractD
draft_contract_policyD
validate_contract_policyD
seal_local_policyD
verify_contract_changeD
list_review_findingsD
get_review_findingD
verify_review_bundleD

Prompts

Interactive templates invoked by user choice

NameDescription

No prompts

Resources

Contextual data attached and managed by the client

NameDescription

No resources

TDQS

D1.9/5.0

Scored across 10 tools

Disambiguation2/5

The tool set includes several pairs with ambiguous boundaries: inspect_document vs inspect_contract likely overlap, and compare_documents vs verify_contract_change seem to address similar tasks. Without descriptions, an agent would struggle to distinguish which tool to call for a given operation.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools use a clear snake_case verb_noun pattern (compare, inspect, draft, validate, seal, verify, list, get). Consistency is high and follows a predictable convention.

Tool Count5/5

10 tools is within the ideal range for a domain covering document comparison and contract policy management. The count is well-scoped with no obvious bloat.

Completeness4/5

Core workflows for contract policy drafting/validation/sealing and review finding retrieval are covered. However, there is no tool for listing or managing documents/contracts, and the generic artifact diffing implied by the server name is thin, leaving minor but noticeable gaps.

Maintenance

ActivityMaintained
ResponsivenessNo issues