Provides summarised output from various actions that could otherwise eat up tokens and cause crashes
The server defines 5 tools with complete input schemas and reasonable descriptions. Tool naming follows verb_noun conventions (summarize_*, get_*). However, several definition quality issues limit the score: (1) output schemas are not documented, the tools return summarized text/JSON but the response structure is not formally specified, making it difficult for LLMs to plan downstream operations; (2) parameter descriptions are present but lack detail about expected formats, ranges, and constraints (e.g., 'hint' and 'output_format' enums are documented but edge cases like 'What happens if both are omitted?' are unclear); (3) error handling descriptions are minimal, tools do not explain recovery paths or validation failures; (4) the 'cwd' parameter on multiple tools lacks validation guidance and could enable path traversal attacks if not sanitized; (5) some descriptions are vague (e.g., 'Summarize the structure of a directory' does not explain what 'structure' means, tree view? file count? size breakdown?). Strengths: tool names are action-oriented and clear; all tools have descriptions meeting the 10-1024 character baseline; schemas use proper JSON types and required fields are marked; the enum constraints for 'hint' and 'output_format' are well-defined.
Retrieve the full content for a given summary ID
Execute a command and summarize its output if it exceeds the threshold
Summarize the structure of a directory
Summarize the contents of one or more files
Summarize any text content (e.g., MCP tool output)
Output schemas not documented for any tool. LLMs cannot plan downstream operations or extract required fields from responses. A summarize_* tool should return {summary: string, token_count: number, original_length: number, ...} but the structure is opaque.
No error recovery guidance. Tools do not explain what happens on failure (e.g., file not found, command timeout, API rate limit) or how LLMs should respond. Descriptions lack 'if X fails, call Y' hints.
'cwd' parameter on summarize_command, summarize_files, and summarize_directory lacks validation guidance. No mention of path traversal prevention, symlink handling, or what happens if cwd is invalid. Potential security issue if not sanitized server-side.
| Scored | Grade | Overall | Spec posture | Rubric |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-22 | D | 55 | 2026-07-28+ | v2 |
| 2026-03-09 | F | 42 | - | v1 |
Parameter constraints underdocumented. 'paths' array has no min/max size. 'command' string has no length limit or injection prevention hints. 'content' in summarize_text has no size limit. Unbounded inputs invite resource exhaustion and LLM errors.
'recursive' parameter on summarize_directory defaults to undefined (implicit false) but description does not state the default. Defaults should be explicit and documented to avoid LLM confusion.
Vague descriptions reduce LLM tool selection confidence. 'Summarize the structure of a directory' does not explain what 'structure' means (tree view? file list? directory hierarchy?). 'Focus area for summarization' in 'hint' is vague, no guidance on what each enum value implies.