Skip to main content
Glama

vibedeploy

by be.vibedeploy

Grep across a site's files

search_files
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search for a literal string or basic regex across all files in either the served dist or the editable source tree. Use this BEFORE batch-reading files to find candidates — saves the 'read 14 batches just to find which 3 files matter' round trip. Pass target: "source" to search the editable tree (requires Site.sourceStored=true).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
globNoFilename glob filter, e.g. '*.js' or '*.{js,html}'. Applied via find before grep so we don't read non-matching files.
nameNo
regexNoWhen true, the pattern is interpreted as a basic regular expression. Default: false (literal substring match).
siteIdNo
targetNoWhere to search. 'dist' (default) searches the served files. 'source' searches the editable source tree (requires Site.sourceStored=true).
patternYesPattern to search for. Treated literal by default; pass regex:true to use as a basic regex (BusyBox grep BRE — no PCRE features).
maxMatchesNoCap on returned matches. Default 200, hard max 1000. Truncation is reported via budgetExceeded.
caseInsensitiveNoDefault: false. When true, adds -i to grep.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
siteIdYes
targetYes
matchesYes
request_idNoServer-assigned request correlation id. Quote it when contacting support.
totalMatchesYes
budgetExceededYesTrue if the search hit maxMatches and there are likely more matches not returned.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / request_id
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Server-assigned request correlation id. Quote it when contacting support.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only and idempotent. Description adds valuable behavioral details: regex limitations (BusyBox grep), match cap with budgetExceeded reporting, and glob filtering mechanism. No contradictions.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with key action, no fluff, each sentence adds value. Highly concise and well-structured.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the complexity (8 parameters, 1 required) and presence of output schema (not shown but assumed), the description covers purpose, usage, key parameters, and behavioral traits. Complete for a read-only search tool.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 75%, but description adds meaning beyond schema: for target, it mentions the requirement for sourceStored; for pattern, explains literal vs regex; for maxMatches, gives default, cap, and truncation behavior; for caseInsensitive, says adds -i. Some parameters like siteId lack extra context, but overall adds value.

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?

Clearly states the tool does a grep search across files, specifying literal or regex, and distinguishes from sibling read tools by emphasizing it's for finding candidates before reading.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly advises using this before batch-reading to avoid wasted round trips. Also clarifies when to use target: 'source' vs 'dist'. Could be improved by mentioning when NOT to use, but overall clear.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All vibedeploy toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools target a distinct resource and action—deploy, file, domain, snapshot, form, analytics—and the descriptions carefully clarify overlap (e.g., deploy_site vs update_site vs begin_deploy). A few pairs like read_file/read_source_file or list_file_hashes/list_source_files could be confused, but the pattern is clear enough to avoid misselection.

Naming Consistency5/5

Every tool follows a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (add_, list_, get_, read_, update_, delete_, verify_, etc.), with singular verbs for single resources and plural verbs for batches. This makes the surface highly predictable.

Tool Count2/5

39 tools is well beyond the typical well-scoped surface and many could be consolidated (e.g., read_file/read_files/read_source_file/read_source_files, or the multiple deploy entry points). The broad domain explains some of the count, but the set feels bloated and will slow tool selection.

Completeness3/5

The core deploy lifecycle is well covered: create/read/update/delete sites, patch files, manage custom domains, and configure forms. However, there are notable gaps—snapshots can be created and listed but not restored or deleted, and there is no explicit rollback-to-previous-deploy mechanism, which are common expectations for a deployment platform.

Resources