Lint documents against MIL-STD / DoD formatting and classification-marking rules. Exposes scan() as an MCP tool for Cognis.Studio.
Single tool 'milstdlint_scan' has a basic description (67 chars) and minimal input schema. The tool name uses verb_noun pattern correctly ('scan' action), but the description lacks critical details: no mention of what 'findings' structure is returned, no guidance on when to use it, no error recovery hints. Input schema defines only 'target' (string) with a 2-word description, no type constraints, no format guidance, no examples of valid paths. Output schema is completely undocumented; the tool returns JSON but the LLM has no visibility into the structure of 'findings' or 'score' fields. No error handling guidance. No pagination, no limits on result size. Baseline: 194 chars avg description, 72 chars avg param annotation; this tool is well below both. The tool is read-only (safe), but lacks the depth expected for production use.
Lint documents against MIL-STD / DoD formatting and classification-marking rules.. Returns JSON findings.
Output schema completely undocumented. Tool returns JSON with 'findings' array and 'score' field, but LLM has no visibility into the structure of findings (fields: id, sev, where?) or how to extract/chain data downstream.
Input parameter 'target' lacks format constraints and validation guidance. No mention of whether it accepts files, directories, or both; no guidance on path format (absolute vs relative); no error recovery hints if path is invalid.
Tool description (67 chars) is below the 10 - 1024 char guideline and lacks critical context: WHAT does it do (lint against MIL-STD rules), WHEN to use it (document compliance checks), WHAT it returns (structured findings with severity/location). Current description is too terse for LLM selection.
| Scored | Grade | Overall | Spec posture | Rubric |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-23 | F | 41 | 2026-07-28+ | v2 |
No error handling guidance. Tool may fail on invalid paths, permission errors, or unsupported file types, but provides no recovery hints. LLM cannot determine if error is retryable or user-fixable.
No result limits or pagination. Tool scans entire directory trees and returns all findings without cap. Large codebases could return thousands of findings, exhausting context window and degrading LLM reasoning.