Skip to main content
Glama

skein_dep_add

Add a typed dependency edge between two issues (blocks, waits-for, related, discovered-from, supersedes, duplicates, parent-child). The PRIMARY way to express ANY relationship between issues — always this or skein_create({dependencies:[...]}), never a free-text ref ("depends on X", "see also Y", "requires Z") in description / acceptance / notes / design: prose is invisible to the dependency graph, skein_ready gating, the UI Dependencies section and close-time warnings.

parent-child only ADDS a parent (parent_already_set if one exists); prefer parentId on skein_create for new children, skein_reparent to move an existing issue, skein_dep_remove to drop an edge.

gate is accepted only on type=waits-for, optional there; it is stored but not evaluated — readiness waits for to itself to close, not for its children. Cross-project edges are allowed within one space if you can see both projects; a target of another space or of a project you cannot see answers issue_not_found, exactly as a nonexistent one; a cycle returns dependency_cycle. Type table and direction semantics: skein_get_instructions ("Dependency edge types").

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "fromId": "<fromId>",
      "toId": "<toId>",
      "type": "<type>"
    },
    "name": "skein_dep_add"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
gateNoOnly on type=waits-for; optional. Stored with the edge but NOT evaluated today: skein_ready holds the from-side until the target itself is closed or standing, whatever its children's state.
toIdYesFull hierarchical id of the TO-side issue (e.g. "billing-9"). May be in a different project.
typeYesDependency type; direction is canonical per type (read as from → to): blocks = from is blocked by to · waits-for = from waits on to (optional `gate` stored, not evaluated) · related = symmetric · discovered-from · supersedes · duplicates · parent-child = from is the child of to. Full table in skein_get_instructions ("Dependency edge types").
fromIdYesFull hierarchical id of the FROM-side issue (e.g. "demo-42").

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already disclose non-readonly, non-destructive, non-idempotent, so the description focuses on semantics: `gate` is stored but not evaluated (readiness waits on the target closing, not its children), cross-project edges are allowed within a space, invisible targets return issue_not_found, and cycles return dependency_cycle. That is real behavioral context beyond the annotations, though it omits what a successful call returns or whether re-adding an identical edge is a no-op (relevant given idempotentHint=false).

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded with purpose, then constraints, then edge cases, and each paragraph carries distinct information. Minor redundancy: the `gate` non-evaluation note appears both in the description and the schema, and the backtick-dense formatting makes it heavier than needed.

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?

For a 4-param mutation with no output schema, the definition covers the failure modes an agent must anticipate (issue_not_found, dependency_cycle, parent_already_set), the cross-space limitation, and the pointer to skein_get_instructions for the full type table. Nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds direction semantics per type and clarifies that `toId` may live in a different project. It does repeat the gate-only-on-waits-for rule that the schema already states, which caps it below 5.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ("Add a typed dependency edge between two issues") and enumerates the seven edge types, so an agent immediately knows what the tool produces. It also positions itself against siblings by declaring itself the PRIMARY way to express relationships versus `skein_create({dependencies:[...]})`.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use (any relationship between issues, never free-text refs in description/acceptance/notes/design) and names concrete alternatives with conditions: `parentId` on skein_create for new children, skein_reparent to move, skein_dep_remove to drop. The parent-child restriction (add-only, `parent_already_set` if a parent exists) is a clear when-not.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.