Skip to main content
Glama
JAAvila-Of

vivac

by JAAvila-Of
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

Record a decision

vivac_decide

Record a settled decision with its reason and every ruled-out alternative, so the same option is not proposed again later.

Instructions

Record a decision, with the reason it was made and every alternative that lost. The choice can be yours or the person's; either way it is a decision, never a note. A norm the person sets for the work from now on is not a choice: file it with vivac_add as a constraint, even when they call it a rule. Call it the moment a choice is actually settled, not before and not long after: the alternatives are optional in the schema and not in practice, because without them the same option gets proposed again in a month by whoever was not in the room. When the project has pillars or rules, name in against the ones this was judged against, each with a sentence: a pillar judged in silence reads the same as one skipped.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
refNoPaths or identifiers this decision is about.
rootNoBorn at the root, with no parent, instead of under the focus. Refused together with parent.
titleYesThe decision, in a few words.
blocksNoIts parent cannot close while this one is still open.
parentNoThe node it hangs from. Defaults to the current focus, or the root if there is none.
reasonYesWhy this and not something else. A decision with no reason is a datum, not a decision.
againstNoA pillar or rule this was judged against and a sentence on how it holds, as one entry: "r12: the write path stays local". Repeat for each one. vivac checks that the pillar or rule exists and still governs; the sentence is not judged.
governsNoGlobs of files this decision's work is expected to touch.
supersedesNoAn earlier decision, constraint, rule or pillar this one retires, while it is still in force.
alternativeNoAn option that was ruled out. Repeat for each one.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.18.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / supersedes / description
      Previous value: -"An earlier decision this one retires."New value: +"An earlier decision, constraint, rule or pillar this one retires, while it is still in force."
  2. First observedv0.17.1

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the mutation profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond them: alternatives are schema-optional but required in practice, vivac validates that each named pillar still governs, and the rationale for capturing alternatives at settlement time. It does not describe permissions or failure modes, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, and every sentence carries content — sibling exclusion, timing, rationale for alternatives, 'against' format. The prose is stream-of-consciousness with no structure, and the norm-versus-decision point is restated, but nothing is truly wasted.

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?

For a 10-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and full schema coverage, the description supplies the non-obvious essentials: field-level conventions for 'against', the practical necessity of 'alternative', and the timing/scope boundary against vivac_add and vivac_note. Return behavior and several structural params are left entirely to the schema, which is acceptable here.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning the schema does not: 'against' entries must be '<pillar-id>: <sentence>' and are existence-checked while the sentence is not judged, and 'alternative' is optional in schema yet non-negotiable in practice. Other params (ref, governs, blocks, supersedes) are left to the schema, so not a full 5.

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 a decision with its reason and losing alternatives — and explicitly distinguishes it from nearby siblings: a norm/rule goes to vivac_add as a constraint, and it is 'never a note' (vivac_note). An agent can route correctly without opening any schema.

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 ('the moment a choice is actually settled, not before and not long after'), explicit when-not (a standing norm or rule is for vivac_add, even if the user calls it a rule), and names the alternative tool. Nothing is left to inference.

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