Skip to main content
Glama

SHPBL: Repository Audit & Repair

by com.shpbl

Search the capability library

library_search
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search the Collective Master Library for a capability in plain words, before writing new code. scope: "catalog" (Practitioner) searches the engineered components — class, what each does, API surface, line counts, verification marks. scope: "vault" searches the discovery-engine index of build-checked syntheses. scope: "composites" searches capabilities earlier runs invented for one host by fusing library parts, each citing its sealed report. Pass ids for whole rows by component ID, with siblings and declared twins. Multi-word queries match term by term and rank; with no exact hit you get the closest rows, labelled as such.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idsNoUp to 20 component IDs (e.g. `STIER-S-84`, `BLD-ENG-303`) returned in full instead of a search.
keyNoYour SHPBL subscription key (shpbl_mcp_…). Optional if your client sends it as the `Authorization: Bearer …` request header.
packNoVault only: restrict to one vertical pack, e.g. `fintech-v1`. Substring match.
pageNo1-based page of results. A page past the end is refused, never returned empty.
limitNoAlias for `page_size`, 1 to 50. Given both, `page_size` wins.
queryNoPlain-words capability, name, ID or API symbol. Omit to page the whole pool.
scopeNo`catalog` — engineered components (Practitioner). `vault` — discovery-engine pipelines. `crown-jewels` — the S-Tier Vault of standalone lab-curated artifacts. `composites` — capabilities past runs invented for one host.catalog
page_sizeNoRows per page, 1 to 50. Defaults to 20.
certified_onlyNoCrown jewels only: return only rows whose body the certification harness executed and read clean (CERTIFIED or PROVISIONAL). This withholds the INCONCLUSIVE rows — bodies the harness could not exercise, which still exist and still ship. Leave this off (the default) to see them too; the withheld figure is reported as `certification.withheldInconclusive`.
component_classNoCatalog only: restrict to one component class, e.g. `CrownJewel/S-Tier`, `Block/Engine`. Substring match.
include_siblingsNoWith `ids`: also list up to 12 other component IDs in the same class, for comparison.

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / page_size / default
      Removed value: -20
    • changedInput schema / properties / page_size / description
      Previous value: -"Rows per page, 1 to 50."New value: +"Rows per page, 1 to 50. Defaults to 20."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / certified_only / description
      Previous value: -"Crown jewels only: return only rows whose body the certification harness executed and read clean (CERTIFIED or PROVISIONAL). Declared, uncertified and failed rows are withheld."New value: +"Crown jewels only: return only rows whose body the certification harness executed and read clean (CERTIFIED or PROVISIONAL). This withholds the INCONCLUSIVE rows — bodies the harness could not exercise, which still exist and still ship. Leave this off (the default) to see them too; the withheld figure is reported as `certification.withheldInconclusive`."
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Alias for `page_size`, 1 to 50. Given both, `page_size` wins.",
+  "type": "number"
+}
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the read-only, idempotent, and open-world annotations, the description discloses real search behavior: multi-word queries are matched term by term and ranked, near-misses return closest rows labeled as such, and ids return whole rows with sibling/twin relationships. It also characterizes each scope's provenance without contradicting the annotations.

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 compact and front-loaded: the first sentence gives purpose and timing, and the following sentences systematically cover scopes, id lookup, and matching behavior. Every sentence contributes distinct information, and the length is appropriate for a tool with four scopes and 11 parameters.

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?

For a read-only search tool with no output schema, the description provides enough context to invoke it correctly: how queries behave, what ids does, and what each scope represents. The well-described schema covers pagination, auth, and scope-specific filters, leaving no critical invocation gap. The only minor ambiguity, what 'declared twins' means, is acceptable given the rest of the context.

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?

The input schema already documents all 11 parameters thoroughly, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying query semantics ('match term by term and rank', closest-row fallback) and by explaining that ids returns full rows with siblings and declared twins. These details go beyond the schema notes without needing to repeat every field.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Search the Collective Master Library for a capability in plain words, before writing new code,' and enumerates the catalog, vault, and composites scopes. It is clearly a search/lookup operation rather than a construction or mutation tool, but it never explicitly contrasts itself with related siblings such as library_document or library_index.

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?

The first sentence gives a concrete trigger: search the library before writing new code. The scope descriptions further tell the agent which library segment each enum value addresses, and the ids mode gives an alternative lookup path. It lacks explicit 'when not to use' guidance or named alternatives such as 'use library_index instead.'

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

All SHPBL: Repository Audit & Repair 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

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Most tools have distinct roles, but the capability-discovery cluster is genuinely confusable: compose_capability calls itself 'the harvest lane' while harvest_repo is 'the harvest,' and evaluate_repo with a key also identifies candidates and composes — an agent must read long descriptions carefully to pick correctly. The free/key mode-switching also makes each tool's effective behavior conditional, raising misselection risk.

Naming Consistency4/5

The dominant pattern is verb_noun (build_intent, evaluate_repo, fix_repo, harvest_repo, list_repos, pin_source, run_contract, run_gauntlet, write_to_repo), and the library_document/library_index/library_search trio follows a deliberate resource-prefix convention. A few outliers break the pattern — welcome (bare verb), selfcheck_mcp, and subscription_status — but they are a small minority and still readable.

Tool Count4/5

At 17 tools the set is slightly past the ideal 3-15 range, but the domain genuinely spans an audit pipeline, a capability library, run orchestration, repo write-back, and billing/onboarding meta-tools. Roughly a third are lightweight informational endpoints (welcome, method_protocol, run_contract, library_index, subscription_status, selfcheck_mcp), which adds surface area, but each has a distinct job and none is redundant.

Completeness4/5

The lifecycle is well covered: pin_source → evaluate_repo → fix_repo → harvest_repo → compose_capability → write_to_repo, with run_gauntlet orchestrating the whole path and run_contract/method_protocol providing gates and discipline. Minor gaps exist — write_to_repo is create-only with no PR update/merge/close, and past run state is only resumable via ledger_digest — but there are no dead ends.

Resources