MCP server for code analysis, refactoring, and deduplication using ast-grep
Scoring was not performed
Output schemas not documented. Code shows Dict[str, Any] return types with no schema visible in MCP tool registration. LLMs cannot predict output structure or plan downstream tool calls.
Stateful tools (apply_deduplication, extract_function, rename_symbol, rewrite_code) do not clearly document risk level or reversibility guarantees in descriptions. 'dry_run' and 'backup' defaults exist in schema but descriptions lack explicit warnings about irreversibility or recovery steps.
Error handling guidance missing. Tools do not document what the LLM should do when errors occur (retry, ask user, fail). No recovery suggestions in descriptions.
Parameter descriptions often too brief (10-30 chars). Examples: 'exclude_patterns': 'Path patterns to exclude' (28 chars). Descriptions lack context on format/constraints: what format are patterns? Glob? Regex? Relative or absolute paths?
Overlapping tool purposes. 'find_duplication', 'analyze_deduplication_candidates', and 'apply_deduplication' are closely related but lack clear guidance on when to use each. LLMs may conflate them.
Tools accept 'path' parameters but descriptions do not clarify expected format: relative vs absolute? File or directory? Encoding? File size limits?
No explicit parameter interdependencies documented. For example, 'complexity_guided' is reserved for future use but still visible in schema, and relationship between 'complexity_guided' and 'complexity_threshold' is not explained.
| Scored | Grade | Overall | Spec posture | Rubric |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-22 | F | 18 | 2026-07-28+ | v2 |
| 2026-03-09 | D | 52 | - | v1 |