Skip to main content
Glama
zesun33

mcp-rtl-review

by zesun33

Server Configuration

Describes the environment variables required to run the server.

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
MCP_RTL_REVIEW_IMAGENoThe container image to use for the RTL review server. Defaults to 'localhost/zesun33/verilog'.localhost/zesun33/verilog
MCP_RTL_REVIEW_RUNTIMENoThe container runtime to use for the RTL review server. Defaults to 'podman'.podman

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
{}

Tools

Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions

NameDescription
rtl_reviewA

Performs full AST-backed static RTL review and semantic code audit on Verilog/SystemVerilog designs, evaluating assignment discipline, reset polarity, bitwidths, undriven nets, and computing a 0–100 quality score with actionable fix suggestions.

rtl_check_assignmentsA

Audits Verilog/SystemVerilog source files specifically for assignment discipline violations: blocking '=' in sequential clocked blocks, or non-blocking '<=' in combinational blocks.

rtl_check_widthsB

Performs semantic bitwidth analysis on Verilog/SystemVerilog designs, detecting implicit truncation and bit expansion mismatches.

rtl_toolchain_infoB

Returns active container/host runtime and version information for the Verilator AST parser and supported rule list.

Prompts

Interactive templates invoked by user choice

NameDescription

No prompts

Resources

Contextual data attached and managed by the client

NameDescription

No resources

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Scored across 4 tools

Disambiguation4/5

The full review tool overlaps with the two targeted check tools, but each has a clearly scoped purpose: comprehensive audit versus specific assignment or width checks. The toolchain info tool is entirely distinct. Some ambiguity exists about when to run the full review versus individual checks, but descriptions mitigate it well.

Naming Consistency3/5

All tools share the rtl_ prefix, but the naming pattern is mixed: two use verb_noun (rtl_check_assignments, rtl_check_widths), while rtl_review is verb-only and rtl_toolchain_info is noun_noun. The inconsistency is noticeable but still readable and predictable given the shared prefix.

Tool Count5/5

Four tools is well-scoped for a focused RTL review server: one comprehensive review, two targeted checks, and one metadata query. Each tool has a clear purpose and the count feels neither thin nor bloated.

Completeness5/5

The full review tool provides broad static-analysis coverage including assignments, reset polarity, widths, and undriven nets, while the targeted check tools allow narrower queries. The toolchain info tool supplies environment and rule-compatibility context. No obvious missing operations are apparent for the stated purpose.

Maintenance

ActivityMaintained
ResponsivenessNo issues