Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
diataxis-mcp-server

diataxis-mcp-server

by willermo
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Suggest documentation refactor

suggest_doc_refactor

Generate incremental refactoring steps from documentation page audits to enhance content structure.

Instructions

Create an incremental refactoring sequence from documentation page audits.

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": {
      "pages": "<pages>"
    },
    "name": "suggest_doc_refactor"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pagesYes
objectiveNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionsYes
sequenceYes
objectiveNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Without annotations, the description fails to disclose behavioral traits like whether the tool is read-only, required permissions, or limitations. It only hints at input being audits but does not elaborate on side effects or output nature.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence, which is concise but lacks structure and detail. It conveys the core purpose but misses opportunities to break down components or add brevity with meaningful content.

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?

Given the complexity of nested parameters and the existence of an output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not elaborate on prerequisites for the input or the format of the refactoring sequence, leaving gaps for an agent to infer.

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

Parameters1/5

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

With 0% schema description coverage and 2 parameters, the description provides no additional meaning beyond the schema. It does not explain the structure of the 'pages' array or the purpose of 'objective', making it inadequate for parameter understanding.

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?

The description clearly specifies the action ('Create') and the resource ('incremental refactoring sequence from documentation page audits'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like audit_doc_page and plan_doc_set.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as after running audits or instead of plan_doc_set. The description lacks context for appropriate usage.

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