Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Gear

Gear

by wvfp
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

lsp-diagnostics

Get GDScript diagnostics for a script file from the Godot Language Server to identify coding issues.

Instructions

[compact alias of lsp_get_diagnostics] Get GDScript diagnostics from Godot Language Server for a script file.

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": {
      "projectPath": "<projectPath>",
      "scriptPath": "<scriptPath>"
    },
    "name": "lsp-diagnostics"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectPathYesAbsolute path to Godot project root
scriptPathYesPath to script relative to project root

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond the basic function. It doesn't mention whether the operation is read-only, what side effects exist, or what the return looks like.

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 very short and front-loaded, with one sentence. No wasted words, but it lacks a title and structured sections.

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 absence of an output schema and the complexity of diagnostics, the description is too minimal. It doesn't explain the format or content of diagnostics, nor how it differs from other script-related tools.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage, so the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's field descriptions for projectPath and scriptPath. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states it gets GDScript diagnostics from Godot Language Server for a script file, with a specific verb and resource. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like script-info.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description mentions it's a compact alias of lsp_get_diagnostics, but that tool is not listed in siblings, and no usage context is provided.

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