compaction-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Add a turn (store mode)

turn_add

Append a message to the transcript. In store mode, if auto-compaction is enabled and pressure exceeds the threshold, the transcript is compacted and the compacted block returned.

Instructions

Append a message to the server-held transcript. Store mode only. When COMPACTION_AUTO=true and pressure crosses the compact-now threshold, compaction fires automatically and the compacted block is returned under autoCompacted.

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": {
      "role": "<role>",
      "content": "<content>"
    },
    "name": "turn_add"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`role`	Yes
`pinned`	No
`content`	Yes
`sessionId`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 7, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the core append behavior and the auto-compaction trigger, which is useful context, but it omits details about response format, error conditions, and prerequisites, leaving notable gaps.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise, with three sentences and a clear front-loaded action. It includes relevant edge-case behavior without unnecessary verbosity, though 'Store mode only' could be clarified.

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?

With no output schema, no annotations, and zero parameter coverage, the description is incomplete. It covers the primary action and one edge case but lacks return value details, mode context, and parameter semantics, making it insufficient for confident invocation.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not mention any of the four parameters (role, content, pinned, sessionId). It adds no meaning beyond the schema's names and types, failing to compensate for the lack of parameter documentation.

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 clearly states the tool's action with a specific verb 'append' and identifies the resource as 'server-held transcript.' It is distinct from the given sibling tools by function, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or differentiate itself from them.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The phrase 'Store mode only' is a condition but not a usage guideline, and no exclusions or alternative tool references are provided.

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