llm-migrate

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Submit Adapted File

submit_adapted_file

Submit a complete adapted application file for review, documenting every change and disposition. Deterministic checks gate the output write, leaving the application tree untouched.

Instructions

Store one complete adapted application file (never a diff) for review.

Same rules as submit_adapted_prompt: dispose every required change in guidance_dispositions and document every edit in annotated_changes (anchors match the raw file content). Deterministic checks gate the write to <run>/output/files/; the application tree is never modified. Pass unchanged=true with empty adapted_content for a reviewed no-change file. Prompt sources are rejected here; use submit_adapted_prompt.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`changes`	No
`run_dir`	Yes
`new_file`	No
`rationale`	Yes
`unchanged`	No
`source_path`	Yes
`adapted_content`	Yes
`annotated_changes`	No
`default_disposition`	No
`guidance_dispositions`	No
`default_disposition_note`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed9 schema fields changedv1.6.0Sep 24, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / annotated_changes

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": true,
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null
+}

addedInput schema / properties / changes / anyOf

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "items": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "type": "array"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]

addedInput schema / properties / changes / default
```
Added value: +null
```
removedInput schema / properties / changes / items
```
Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
```
removedInput schema / properties / changes / type
```
Removed value: -"array"
```

addedInput schema / properties / default_disposition

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "enum": [
+        "applied",
+        "not_applicable",
+        "declined"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null
+}

addedInput schema / properties / default_disposition_note

Added value: +{
+  "default": "",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / guidance_dispositions

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null
+}

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "run_dir",
-  "source_path",
-  "adapted_content",
-  "rationale",
-  "changes"
-]New value: +[
+  "run_dir",
+  "source_path",
+  "adapted_content",
+  "rationale"
+]

Changed1 schema field changedv1.3.0Sep 19, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / unchanged
```
Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```
Addedv1.2.0Sep 16, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that deterministic checks gate the write to `<run>/output/files/`, that the application tree is never modified, and that prompt sources are rejected. This provides an accurate safety and side-effect model beyond the schema.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose and each sentence delivers a distinct, necessary rule: file type, shared rules, write location, no-modification guarantee, no-change mode, and rejection of prompt sources. No filler or redundancy exists.

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 complex 11-parameter tool with no annotations, the description covers the main flow, critical constraints, key parameters, and the primary sibling alternative. Since an output schema exists, return-value details are unnecessary. The description is sufficient for correct invocation, with only minor reliance on the sibling tool for shared rules.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning for adapted_content (complete file, never a diff), unchanged (true with empty adapted_content), guidance_dispositions (dispose every required change), annotated_changes (document every edit with anchors matching raw content), and run_dir (write target). However, several parameters such as rationale, source_path, changes, new_file, and default_disposition remain unexplained, leaving some inference burden on the agent.

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?

The description uses a specific verb ('Store') and resource ('complete adapted application file') and distinguishes itself from the sibling submit_adapted_prompt by explicitly stating that prompt sources are rejected. An agent can immediately tell this tool handles file content, not prompt sources.

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?

It gives explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance: 'Prompt sources are rejected here; use submit_adapted_prompt'. It also explains the no-change case ('Pass unchanged=true with empty adapted_content') and forbids diffs ('never a diff'). These are concrete selection and invocation rules.

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

Deploy Server