Skip to main content
Glama

arifOS — Constitutional AI Kernel

by io.github.ariffazil
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

111 Observe · Sense Reality

arif_observe
Read-onlyIdempotent

KERNEL 111 · Sense reality into evidence with epistemic tags and uncertainty bounds.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlNo
modeNosearch
queryNo
layersNo
actor_idNo
_envelopeNo
session_idNo
result_limitNo
session_tokenNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / session_token
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": true,
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / mode / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "search",
-  "hybrid_discovery",
-  "ingest",
-  "compass",
-  "atlas",
-  "entropy_dS",
-  "vitals"
-]New value: +[
+  "search",
+  "fetch",
+  "hybrid_discovery",
+  "ingest",
+  "compass",
+  "atlas",
+  "entropy_dS",
+  "vitals"
+]
  4. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedOutput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +true
    • removedOutput schema / properties
      Removed value: -{
-  "_nine_signal_compliant": {
-    "description": "Internal compliance flag",
-    "type": "boolean"
-  },
-  "_violations": {
-    "description": "Non-compliance audit trail",
-    "items": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "type": "array"
-  },
-  "actor_id": {
-    "description": "Sovereign or agent actor ID",
-    "type": [
-      "string",
-      "null"
-    ]
-  },
-  "delta_S": {
-    "description": "Thermodynamic entropy change",
-    "type": "number"
-  },
-  "meta": {
-    "description": "Metadata including actor_id, mode, circuit",
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  "nine_signal": {
-    "description": "F2 addendum nine-signal block",
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  "output_policy": {
-    "description": "Policy constraints: DOMAIN_SEAL, DOMAIN_HOLD, DOMAIN_VOID, SIMULATION_ONLY",
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "reasons": {
-    "description": "Human-readable justification list",
-    "items": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "type": "array"
-  },
-  "result": {
-    "description": "Tool-specific payload",
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  "session_id": {
-    "description": "Active session identifier",
-    "type": [
-      "string",
-      "null"
-    ]
-  },
-  "stage_progression": {
-    "description": "Next stage auto-chain hint",
-    "type": [
-      "object",
-      "null"
-    ]
-  },
-  "status": {
-    "description": "Execution status: OK, ERROR, TIMEOUT, DRY_RUN",
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "timestamp": {
-    "description": "ISO-8601 timestamp",
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "tool": {
-    "description": "Canonical tool name that produced this response",
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "verdict": {
-    "description": "Constitutional verdict: SEAL, HOLD, VOID, SABAR, PROVISIONAL, PARTIAL",
-    "type": "string"
-  }
-}
    • removedOutput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "status",
-  "tool",
-  "verdict",
-  "result",
-  "nine_signal",
-  "reasons"
-]
  5. First observed

TDQS

D1.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, providing a safe behavioral profile. The description adds that the tool produces 'evidence with epistemic tags and uncertainty bounds,' which gives some extra context but doesn't elaborate on side effects, auth needs, or rate limits. The annotations carry most of the burden, so a 3 is appropriate.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely short (one sentence), which is concise, but it sacrifices substance. For a tool with 9 parameters and no output schema, the brevity leads to under-specification. It is not appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (9 parameters, 0 required, no output schema), the description provides almost no complete picture. It mentions epistemic tags and uncertainty but omits what the tool returns, how modes differ, and how parameters interact. The annotations help but cannot compensate for the lack of concrete operational details.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, meaning the description does not explain any of the 9 parameters. Cryptic parameters like '_envelope', 'layers', and the eight distinct modes (e.g., 'entropy_dS', 'compass') are left entirely unexplained. The agent cannot determine how to set values correctly based on the description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses poetic language ('sense reality into evidence') but lacks concrete specifics about what the tool does. It hints at gathering data with epistemic tags but doesn't clarify the operation. The name 'observe' and 'KERNEL 111' suggest a sensing function, but the purpose is vague compared to sibling tools like arif_forge or arif_judge.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like arif_memory or arif_judge. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or contextual triggers, making it hard for an agent to decide when to invoke it.

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

All arifOS — Constitutional AI Kernel 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