Navigate the clause tree of a spec (core / js-api / web-api), filterable by source path (syntax, valid, exec, binary, text, appendix), anchor_prefix, titled_only, and max_level.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | No | Source path / prefix. | |
| spec | No | Which spec (default core). | |
| max_level | No | Cap heading depth. | |
| titled_only | No | Drop anchor-only blocks. | |
| anchor_prefix | No | Id/anchor prefix. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds context by stating it navigates (implies traversal, not just listing) and filters by various parameters. 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single sentence with a dash-separated list. Front-loaded with main purpose. Could be slightly improved with better punctuation (e.g., parentheses for list). Efficient overall.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
No output schema, so description should hint at return format (tree structure). It does not. Also lacks mention of sorting or pagination. However, parameter details are comprehensive enough for a read-only navigation tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema: it explains 'path' as source path/prefix, lists spec enums, caps heading depth with max_level, drops anchor-only blocks with titled_only, and identifies anchor_prefix as id/anchor prefix. This fully compensates for any schema brevity.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb ('Navigate') and clearly identifies the resource (clause tree of a spec). It lists available specs and filter options, distinguishing it from siblings like 'section_get' (single section) and 'instruction_list' (different resource).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies usage for exploring or filtering the clause tree but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'section_get', 'spec_search', or 'instruction_list'. No when-not or alternative guidance is provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct aspect of WebAssembly: instructions (get/list/search), proposals (list), spec sections (get/list/search), version info, and types. No overlapping purposes.
All tools use consistent snake_case with verb_noun pattern: instruction_get, instruction_list, instruction_search, proposal_list, section_get, section_list, spec_search, spec_version, type_get.
9 tools is well-scoped for a WebAssembly reference server, covering instructions, specs, proposals, types, and metadata without being overwhelming.
Covers core retrieval and search for instructions, specs, proposals, and types. Minor gaps like no dedicated proposal get or type list, but the set is sufficient for typical exploration tasks.