torbjorn/my-pal-mcp-server
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Overall savings should now be 50%+ tokens used

Browse Source 
perf: tweaks to schema descriptions, aiming to reduce token usage without performance degradation
This commit is contained in:
Fahad
2025-10-01 22:39:12 +04:00
parent f69ff03c4d
commit cc8a4dfd21
9 changed files with 108 additions and 235 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

44
tools/codereview.py
View File

@@ -35,36 +35,30 @@ logger = logging.getLogger(__name__)
# Tool-specific field descriptions for code review workflow
CODEREVIEW_WORKFLOW_FIELD_DESCRIPTIONS = {
"step": (
"Review plan. Step 1: State strategy. Later: Report findings. "
"MUST examine quality, security, performance, architecture. Use 'relevant_files' for code. NO large snippets."
"Review narrative. Step 1: outline the review strategy. Later steps: report findings. MUST cover quality, security, "
"performance, and architecture. Reference code via `relevant_files`; avoid dumping large snippets."
),
"step_number": "Current step index in review sequence (starts at 1). Build upon previous steps.",
"step_number": "Current review step (starts at 1) – each step should build on the last.",
"total_steps": (
"Estimated steps needed to complete the review. "
"IMPORTANT: For external validation, max 2 steps. For internal validation, use 1 step. "
"When continuation_id is provided (continuing a previous conversation), set to 2 max for external, 1 for internal."
"Number of review steps planned. External validation: two steps (analysis + summary). Internal validation: one step. "
"Use the same limits when continuing an existing review via continuation_id."
),
"next_step_required": (
"True to continue with another step, False when review is complete. "
"CRITICAL for external validation: Set to True on step 1, then False on step 2. "
"For internal validation: Set to False immediately. "
"When continuation_id is provided: Follow the same rules based on validation type."
"True when another review step follows. External validation: step 1 → True, step 2 → False. Internal validation: set False immediately. "
"Apply the same rule on continuation flows."
),
"findings": (
"Discoveries: quality, security, performance, architecture. "
"Document positive+negative. Update in later steps."
),
"files_checked": "All examined files (absolute paths), including ruled-out ones.",
"relevant_files": "Step 1: All files/dirs for review. Final: Subset with key findings (issues, patterns, decisions).",
"relevant_context": "Methods/functions central to findings: 'Class.method' or 'function'. Focus on issues/patterns.",
"issues_found": "Issues with 'severity' (critical/high/medium/low) and 'description'. Vulnerabilities, performance, quality.",
"review_validation_type": "'external' (default, expert model) or 'internal' (no expert). Default external unless user specifies.",
"backtrack_from_step": "Step number to backtrack from if revision needed.",
"images": "Optional diagrams, mockups, visuals for review context (absolute paths). Include if materially helpful.",
"review_type": "Review type: full, security, performance, quick.",
"focus_on": "Specific aspects or context for areas of concern.",
"standards": "Coding standards to enforce.",
"severity_filter": "Minimum severity to report.",
"findings": "Capture findings (positive and negative) across quality, security, performance, and architecture; update each step.",
"files_checked": "Absolute paths of every file reviewed, including those ruled out.",
"relevant_files": "Step 1: list all files/dirs under review. Must be absolute full non-abbreviated paths. Final step: narrow to files tied to key findings.",
"relevant_context": "Functions or methods central to findings (e.g. 'Class.method' or 'function_name').",
"issues_found": "Issues with severity (critical/high/medium/low) and descriptions.",
"review_validation_type": "Set 'external' (default) for expert follow-up or 'internal' for local-only review.",
"backtrack_from_step": "If revising earlier analysis, note the step number to revisit.",
"images": "Optional diagram or screenshot paths that clarify review context.",
"review_type": "Review focus: full, security, performance, or quick.",
"focus_on": "Optional note on areas to emphasise (e.g. 'threading', 'auth flow').",
"standards": "Coding standards or style guides to enforce.",
"severity_filter": "Lowest severity to include when reporting issues (critical/high/medium/low/all).",
}