callimachus

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

record_decision

Save a project decision with its rationale to memory for later recall, and replace a prior decision by passing its ID when the new choice reverses it.

Instructions

Record a decision just made (with rationale when known) into project memory for later recall and check_decision. If it reverses a recalled one, pass its id as replaces. Omit project for the current repo.

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": {
      "text": "<text>"
    },
    "name": "record_decision"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`text`	Yes	What to remember, as one concrete sentence.
`project`	No	Project path; omit for the current repo.
`replaces`	No	Id of a recalled fact this one reverses or replaces; that one becomes history.
`rationale`	No	For a decision: why it was made.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.11.4Nov 11, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / replaces

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Id of a recalled fact this one reverses or replaces; that one becomes history.",
+  "format": "int64",
+  "type": [
+    "integer",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "properties": {
+        "id": {
+          "type": [
+            "integer",
+            "null"
+          ]
+        },
+        "kind": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "message": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "project": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "replaces": {
+          "properties": {
+            "id": {
+              "type": "integer"
+            },
+            "reason": {
+              "type": [
+                "string",
+                "null"
+              ]
+            },
+            "result": {
+              "oneOf": [
+                {
+                  "const": "replaced",
+                  "type": "string"
+                },
+                {
+                  "const": "disputed",
+                  "type": "string"
+                },
+                {
+                  "const": "rejected",
+                  "type": "string"
+                }
+              ]
+            }
+          },
+          "required": [
+            "id",
+            "result"
+          ],
+          "type": [
+            "object",
+            "null"
+          ]
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "kind",
+        "project",
+        "message"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    {
+      "properties": {
+        "notice": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "notice"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed5 schema fields changedv0.11.3Nov 6, 2026

removedInput schema / $schema

Removed value: -"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

changedInput schema / properties / project / description

Previous value: -"Project-path substring to attach it to; omit to use the repo the server runs in."New value: +"Project path; omit for the current repo."

changedInput schema / properties / rationale / description

Previous value: -"For a decision, WHY it was made (the rationale). Surfaced by check_decision later."New value: +"For a decision: why it was made."

changedInput schema / properties / text / description

Previous value: -"What to remember (one concrete sentence)."New value: +"What to remember, as one concrete sentence."

removedInput schema / title
```
Removed value: -"RememberArgs"
```

Changed1 schema field changedv0.6.2Jun 23, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / rationale

Added value: +{
+  "description": "For a decision, WHY it was made (the rationale). Surfaced by check_decision later.",
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}

Addedv0.6.0Jun 21, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare write (readOnlyHint=false), non-idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. Beyond that, the description adds persistence semantics ('into project memory for later recall and check_decision') and the consequence of `replaces`, which matter for a memory write. What it does not add is what happens on a near-duplicate record, which the non-idempotent hint leaves ambiguous.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then the conditional path, then the default. Nothing is padded and each clause carries a distinct instruction.

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

Completeness4/5

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

The tool is a simple single-write with four fully documented params and an output schema, so return handling and most field meaning are already covered elsewhere. The description supplies the lifecycle context (recall, check_decision, history via replaces) needed to call it correctly; only duplicate-handling guidance 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%, and the description's parameter notes (rationale when known, replaces for a reversal, omit project for the current repo) largely restate the schema text. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already carries the per-field meaning.

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

Purpose4/5

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

Names a specific verb and resource ('Record a decision') plus the destination ('into project memory'), and points at two downstream consumers (later recall and check_decision). It does not explicitly separate itself from adjacent writers like record_gotcha or flag_fact, so an agent must infer the decision-vs-gotcha boundary from the noun alone.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives clear timing ('just made'), a conditional ('with rationale when known'), a special-case path ('If it reverses a recalled one, pass its id as replaces'), and a default ('Omit project for the current repo'). It stops short of stating when NOT to use it in favor of a sibling writer, but the conditions it does give are actionable.

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