Skip to main content
Glama
antonbabenko

Deliberation

by antonbabenko
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
JavaScript
Remote

scope-analyst

Read-only

Analyzes vague or ambiguous requests to identify missing requirements, hidden constraints, and pitfalls before planning starts. Delivers structured findings from multiple AI providers to clarify scope and prevent rework.

Instructions

Pre-planning consultant that catches ambiguities, hidden requirements, and pitfalls before planning begins. Use when a request is vague or could be interpreted multiple ways. Fans out to the configured provider panel with this persona (advisory; each provider needs its key/CLI, rate limits apply) and returns a text-wrapped JSON envelope { results[] }.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cwdNoWorking directory the provider runs in (used to resolve relative file refs). Defaults to the server process directory.
filesNoOptional attachments for providers that read files (Grok/OpenRouter; inlined as context for Codex/Gemini). Each item is EXACTLY ONE of path/dir/file_id/file_url.
expertNoOptional persona: architect, plan-reviewer, scope-analyst, code-reviewer, security-analyst, researcher, or debugger. On a named expert tool the tool's own persona wins and this is ignored.
promptYesThe question or task for the provider(s)/expert.
reasoningEffortNoReasoning depth where the provider supports it (Grok, OpenRouter): low, medium, high, or none. CLI providers (Codex, Gemini) ignore it.
developerInstructionsNoOptional system/developer instructions injected verbatim; overrides the built-in persona for `expert`.

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed11 schema fields changedv3.8.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / cwd / description
      Added value: +"Working directory the provider runs in (used to resolve relative file refs). Defaults to the server process directory."
    • addedInput schema / properties / developerInstructions / description
      Added value: +"Optional system/developer instructions injected verbatim; overrides the built-in persona for `expert`."
    • addedInput schema / properties / expert / description
      Added value: +"Optional persona: architect, plan-reviewer, scope-analyst, code-reviewer, security-analyst, researcher, or debugger. On a named expert tool the tool's own persona wins and this is ignored."
    • addedInput schema / properties / files / description
      Added value: +"Optional attachments for providers that read files (Grok/OpenRouter; inlined as context for Codex/Gemini). Each item is EXACTLY ONE of path/dir/file_id/file_url."
    • addedInput schema / properties / files / items / properties / dir / description
      Added value: +"Directory to attach; expanded recursively by providers that support it."
    • addedInput schema / properties / files / items / properties / file_id / description
      Added value: +"Id of a file already uploaded to the provider (e.g. Grok Files API)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / files / items / properties / file_url / description
      Added value: +"Public URL for the provider to fetch."
    • addedInput schema / properties / files / items / properties / mode / description
      Added value: +"Delivery: auto (size-based), inline (embed as text), or upload (provider Files API)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / files / items / properties / path / description
      Added value: +"Path to a single file to attach (resolved against cwd)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / prompt / description
      Added value: +"The question or task for the provider(s)/expert."
    • addedInput schema / properties / reasoningEffort / description
      Added value: +"Reasoning depth where the provider supports it (Grok, OpenRouter): low, medium, high, or none. CLI providers (Codex, Gemini) ignore it."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Disclosed behaviors include 'fans out to configured provider panel', 'advisory persona', 'each provider needs its key/CLI, rate limits apply', and 'returns text-wrapped JSON envelope { results[] }'. This adds context beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint) without contradiction.

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?

Two sentences only: first sentence states purpose and use condition, second explains behavior and output. Front-loaded, no redundancy, every sentence adds value.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given no output schema, the description covers the return envelope shape. It also mentions provider dependencies. However, the structure of results[] is not detailed, but acceptable given the tool's advisory role.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add any meaning or usage guidance for individual parameters beyond what the schema already provides.

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 states the tool is a 'pre-planning consultant' that 'catches ambiguities, hidden requirements, and pitfalls before planning begins.' It specifies when to use ('vague or could be interpreted multiple ways'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like architect or plan-reviewer.

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 states 'Use when a request is vague or could be interpreted multiple ways.' Provides clear context but does not explicitly mention when not to use or suggest alternative sibling tools.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/antonbabenko/deliberation'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server