Skip to main content
Glama

Traceable

by com.traceabledocs.app
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Rename a TraceID

traceable_trace_id_rename
DestructiveIdempotent

Rename a row's visible TraceID in place (a traceable row or an ID-grid row). The row keeps its database identity, so every trace link into or out of it survives; an ID-grid row's id cell is kept in sync and cached link labels that reference the old id are refreshed project-wide. Use this instead of delete-and-reinsert, which would break links. To renumber a whole grid, call this once per row (re-read afterwards is not needed — anchor by TraceID).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toItemIdYesThe new visible TraceID (e.g. UN-1), unique within the document
documentIdYesThe document UUID containing the row
fromItemIdYesThe current visible TraceID (e.g. UN-1.1)
baseRevisionNoThe revision (meta.revision) from the traceable_doc_read, or the previous write, this change is based on. When given, the write is refused with nothing changed if the document has changed since, so you never overwrite edits you have not seen. Each write returns the current revision. The revision tracks the document's content rows, so changes that touch no row (its name and other metadata, the reference list, Test Plan entries) return it unchanged. A revision is an opaque value: compare it whole, never read meaning into its parts (they are not a counter).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / baseRevision
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The revision (meta.revision) from the traceable_doc_read, or the previous write, this change is based on. When given, the write is refused with nothing changed if the document has changed since, so you never overwrite edits you have not seen. Each write returns the current revision. The revision tracks the document's content rows, so changes that touch no row (its name and other metadata, the reference list, Test Plan entries) return it unchanged. A revision is an opaque value: compare it whole, never read meaning into its parts (they are not a counter).",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description's real contribution is the in-place semantics: database identity is preserved, inbound/outbound trace links survive, ID-grid id cells are kept in sync, and cached link labels are refreshed project-wide. It also describes the revision guard, though conflict handling is left mostly to the schema's baseRevision text.

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?

Three sentences, each carrying a distinct load: what changes, what is preserved, and the alternative/batch strategy. The most decision-relevant fact (identity and links survive) is front-loaded with no filler.

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

Completeness5/5

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

No output schema exists, yet the description covers the mutation's side effects (label cache refresh, id-cell sync) and the anchor/re-read behavior an agent needs to chain calls. Nothing essential for a correct invocation is missing.

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 fromItemId/toItemId/documentId/baseRevision are already well documented in the schema itself. The description adds the notion of anchoring by TraceID after a batch rename but no format or value constraints beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ('Rename a row's visible TraceID in place') and scopes it to two row kinds (traceable row, ID-grid row). An agent can distinguish it from siblings like traceable_doc_rename_prefix or traceable_block_update without opening any schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly routes away from the tempting alternative ('Use this instead of delete-and-reinsert, which would break links') and gives a concrete batch pattern ('To renumber a whole grid, call this once per row'). Both when-to-use and when-not-to-use conditions are stated.

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

All Traceable toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources