Skip to main content
Glama

developer-toolkit-mcp

by io.github.mjaskolski

Search the documentation

search
Read-only

Search the AI Developer Toolkit documentation: 950+ guides on Cursor, Claude Code and OpenAI Codex, covering setup, agent workflows, hooks, MCP, testing, CI and deployment, in English and Polish. Returns ranked results; pass a result id to fetch for the full text.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesNatural-language query or keywords. Polish queries return Polish articles.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultsYes

Schema Changelog

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

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only and closed-world. The description adds extra context about returning ranked results and the bilingual (English/Polish) nature, which goes beyond the annotations. This is useful but not over-elaborated, so a 4 is appropriate.

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 two sentences, front-loads the tool's purpose and scope, and wastes no words. It efficiently communicates all needed information without redundancy.

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?

With a clear scope, ranked results, language coverage, and a pointer to the sibling tool for full text, combined with read-only annotations and an output schema, the description is complete. There is no missing behavioral or workflow context for this simple tool.

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 schema description already fully covers the `query` parameter (100% coverage), and the description does not add further parameter-specific meaning. The description mentions Polish and English, but that overlaps with schema information about Polish queries, so the added value is minimal.

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 identifies the tool as a search over the AI Developer Toolkit documentation, specifies the covered topics and languages, and distinguishes itself from the sibling tool `fetch` by stating that full text is retrieved via a result id.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It explicitly states the workflow: 'pass a result id to fetch for the full text' – indicating when to use fetch and that search is for initial ranked results. This provides clear alternative usage for full text retrieval.

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

All developer-toolkit-mcp 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

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

The two tools have completely distinct purposes: search queries the documentation index, while fetch retrieves a specific article by ID. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.

Naming Consistency4/5

Both tool names are single lowercase verbs ('search', 'fetch'), which is consistent in style. However, they lack a noun prefix (e.g., 'search_docs', 'fetch_article'), but the pattern is uniform and predictable.

Tool Count3/5

With only 2 tools, the set feels minimal but is perfectly scoped for a documentation search-and-retrieve utility. It's on the low end of acceptable, but the narrow purpose justifies the small count.

Completeness4/5

The search-fetch pair covers the core workflow for documentation lookup. A 'list' or 'browse' tool could be useful, but for a search-driven retrieval server, these two tools satisfy the primary use case without major gaps.

Resources