Skip to main content
Glama
IBazylchuk

Paparats: Local Semantic Code Search

by IBazylchuk
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Record Decision

arch_record_decision

Record non-obvious architectural decisions; a similarity gate flags duplicates or related choices before writing.

Instructions

Record an architectural decision. Use when you pick a library, pattern, or boundary that wasn't obvious. The server runs a similarity gate against existing decisions in the group; possible outcomes:

  • created: a new decision was written.

  • duplicate: a nearly identical decision already exists — nothing is written. Ask the user why arch_context did not surface it earlier.

  • similar: a related decision exists — nothing is written. To explicitly replace it, re-call with supersedes set to its id; otherwise sharpen the wording. Passing supersedes bypasses the gate and marks the named prior decision as superseded.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
groupYesTarget group
scopeNoglobal
titleYesShort imperative title — e.g. "Use qwen3-embedding-0.6b for arch-layer text embeddings".
contextYesOne sentence: the problem that forced the decision.
projectNoOptional. Project this decision is scoped to (same value the indexer uses in `payload.project`). Omit for decisions that apply across all projects in the group.
decisionYesOne sentence: what was chosen.
supersedesNoId of a previous decision this one replaces. Bypasses the duplicate gate — pass only when you are deliberately replacing a known prior decision.
consequencesYesMarkdown bullet list, 2-5 items. Each item is one sentence: a consequence, a trade-off, or a required follow-up.
alternatives_rejectedNoMarkdown bullet list, one per rejected alternative: - **<option name>:** why rejected (one sentence) - **<option name>:** why rejected (one sentence) Use an empty string only if no real alternatives were considered.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already identify this as a non-read-only, non-open-world, non-destructive write. The description adds important behavior beyond that: a similarity gate is run, `duplicate` and `similar` outcomes write nothing, and `supersedes` bypasses the gate and marks the prior decision as superseded.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose, then cleanly lists the three gate outcomes. The `supersedes` escape hatch is clearly separated, and every section adds actionable information.

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?

Given a 9-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description supplies the missing outcome semantics and replacement workflow. It is complete enough for an agent to invoke the tool correctly and interpret the gate outcomes.

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 89%, so most parameters are already well documented. The description still adds meaningful semantics for `supersedes`, explaining that it bypasses the duplicate gate and marks a prior decision as superseded, which is not fully captured by the schema alone.

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 and resource: "Record an architectural decision." It also frames the intended trigger condition—non-obvious choices about libraries, patterns, or boundaries—and distinguishes the resulting behavior from simply reading context via `arch_context`.

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 guidance: "Use when you pick a library, pattern, or boundary that wasn't obvious." It also explains what to do when a duplicate or similar decision is found, including the `supersedes` alternative for deliberate replacement.

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