Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ctxvault

ctxvault

by Filippo-Venturini
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

supersede_episode

Replace a recorded episode with corrected or updated information, linking the old and new statements so change history stays readable. Use when new details contradict existing memory.

Instructions

Replace an episode with a corrected or updated version. The old statement is closed exactly where the new one begins and the two are linked, so the history of what changed stays readable. Entities and salience carry over from the old episode unless you pass new ones. Use this whenever new information contradicts something already recorded.

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": {
      "vault_name": "<vault_name>",
      "episode_id": "<episode_id>",
      "content": "<content>"
    },
    "name": "supersede_episode"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sourceNo
contentYes
entitiesNo
salienceNo
episode_idYes
vault_nameYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
episodeYes
vault_nameYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.9.1

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does well: it explains that the old statement is closed at the new one's start point, the two are linked, and history remains readable, plus inheritance behavior for entities and salience. Gaps remain around permissions, reversibility, and what happens if episode_id does not exist.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the action, then the mechanism, then default behavior, then the trigger condition. No sentence is redundant or restates structured data.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, and the description covers the mutation's lifecycle semantics well. For a destructive replacement operation with zero annotation coverage, it could say more about irreversibility and the undefined 'source' parameter, but nothing critical for a correct call 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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it clarifies the two non-obvious parameters: entities and salience carry over from the old episode unless new values are passed, which resolves the ambiguous empty-array/null defaults. It says nothing about 'source', and vault_name/episode_id are only implied by name.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Replace an episode with a corrected or updated version') and describes the linking/closure mechanism, which implicitly separates it from a plain rewrite. It does not name or contrast with the close siblings revise_episode, invalidate_episode, or confirm_episode, so an agent still has to infer the boundary.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Gives one concrete trigger ('whenever new information contradicts something already recorded'), which is genuinely useful. However, with revise_episode and invalidate_episode in the sibling set, no when-not-to-use guidance or explicit alternative routing is provided, leaving the choice among three overlapping mutation tools underspecified.

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