Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Config Drift Guard MCP

Config Drift Guard MCP

by xiaohuxi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Inspect configuration

inspect_config
Read-onlyIdempotent

Parse and normalize a local configuration file while masking detected secrets to prevent exposure.

Instructions

Parse and normalize a local config file while masking detected secrets.

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": {
      "filePath": "<filePath>"
    },
    "name": "inspect_config"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
filePathYesAbsolute path to a .env, YAML, JSON, or Properties file

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds that it normalizes and masks secrets, which is useful but not extensive. No contradiction.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the core function without any superfluous words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given only one parameter and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It could optionally mention the return format or error conditions, but it adequately covers the tool's purpose.

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% and the description of filePath is already detailed in the schema. The tool description does not add any additional semantics beyond the schema.

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 states the verb (parse and normalize), resource (local config file), and additional action (masking secrets). It distinguishes from siblings: scan_secrets (scanning) and compare_configs (comparing).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies use for parsing configs, but does not explicitly state when to use or when to avoid, nor does it mention alternative tools. The context from sibling names provides some distinction, but the description could be more directive.

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