compaction-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Untrack files

files_untrack

Stops re-hydration of specified files during context compaction, removing them from tracking so they are not reloaded when session context is restored.

Instructions

Stop re-hydrating the given files.

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": {
      "paths": "<paths>"
    },
    "name": "files_untrack"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`paths`	Yes
`sessionId`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 7, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the action ('stop re-hydrating') but omits side effects, reversibility, permission requirements, or impact on existing state/sessions.

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 a single, focused sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and clear.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It doesn't explain the context system, what re-hydration entails, or usage scenarios. Sibling tools are not referenced for differentiation.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%. The description only implies that 'given files' correspond to the paths parameter, but doesn't explain the sessionId parameter or path format. This is insufficient compensation.

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 clearly states the tool stops re-hydrating specified files, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like files_track and files_rehydrate by describing the inverse action.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, exclusions, or context where untracking is appropriate.

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