Skip to main content
Glama
DeusData

codebase-memory-mcp

by DeusData
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

manage_adr

Destructive

Manage Architecture Decision Records: outline headings, read full documents, replace entire content, or rewrite selected sections while leaving all other bytes unchanged.

Instructions

Outline an ADR by default; get reads it; update replaces it

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modeNooutline pages headings; get reads; update replaces the whole document; set_sections rewrites only the named sections and leaves every other byte untouched (an identical repeated write is byte-identical, so retrying is safe); sections is legacy.outline
formatNotree
contentNoWhole document for update
projectYes
section_limitNo
section_offsetNo
section_updatesNoset_sections: section name -> new body. Any heading name works; names match exactly, including case.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed8 schema fields changedv0.11.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / content / description
      Previous value: -"Complete replacement document required by update"New value: +"Whole document for update"
    • addedInput schema / properties / format
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "tree",
+  "enum": [
+    "tree",
+    "json"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / mode / default
      Added value: +"outline"
    • changedInput schema / properties / mode / description
      Previous value: -"update replaces the entire ADR document; sections only lists existing headings"New value: +"outline pages headings; get reads; update replaces the whole document; set_sections rewrites only the named sections and leaves every other byte untouched (an identical repeated write is byte-identical, so retrying is safe); sections is legacy."
    • changedInput schema / properties / mode / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "get",
-  "update",
-  "sections"
-]New value: +[
+  "outline",
+  "get",
+  "update",
+  "set_sections",
+  "sections"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / section_limit
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 50,
+  "maximum": 500,
+  "minimum": 1,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / section_offset
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 0,
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / section_updates
      Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "description": "set_sections: section name -> new body. Any heading name works; names match exactly, including case.",
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.10.4
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": true,
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  3. Addedv0.10.0
  4. Removedv0.9.0
  5. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description explicitly states that 'update replaces it', aligning with the destructiveHint annotation and adding specificity. It also notes 'get reads it', which is read-only. This adds behavioral context beyond the annotations, though it does not cover set_sections behavior.

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 extremely concise with two short sentences, front-loading the default behavior. No redundant words, but it sacrifices completeness for brevity.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a tool with 7 parameters, a mode enum, and no output schema, the description is too minimal. It fails to mention the set_sections mode, section pagination parameters, or format options, leaving important aspects unexplained.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The description does not elaborate on any parameters beyond what the schema already provides. With schema coverage at 43%, the description should compensate for undocumented parameters like format, section_limit, and section_offset, but it does not.

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?

The description states a specific verb+resource ('Outline an ADR') and contrasts it with 'get reads' and 'update replaces', clarifying it manages ADRs. It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on ADRs, but omits the set_sections mode, which is a significant feature.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention sibling tools, exclusions, or specific conditions for using different modes, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name and schema.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools