Skip to main content
Glama
JAAvila-Of

vivac

by JAAvila-Of
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

Why a node exists

vivac_why
Read-only

Trace why a work node exists in a provenance tree: follow its goal-to-node chain, open siblings and children, blockers, and descendants to see what prevents closure.

Instructions

Why a node exists: the chain from the goal down to it, what is open in parallel, what was born from it, and what blocks it from closing. This is the question the whole tool exists to answer. Open siblings and children are capped at eight each, every blocking one kept, and the node's newest three notes come whole with the rest counted; full brings them all. Walking siblings one after another, pass only: their shared path came with the first.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe node as the tree names it: g1, t12, f74, d29.
fullNoEvery sibling and every child still open, not only the eight the answer keeps, plus each step's anchor, standing decisions and what was open at the time: what vivac why --full prints. Refused together with project.
onlyNoThe node alone: no path, no siblings, no children. For the next sibling once one why has already brought the path they share.
projectNoOpens a node that lives in another tree: a project name from `vivac_find`'s `everywhere`, since an alias only means something inside its own tree.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.17.12
    • addedInput schema / properties / only
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The node alone: no path, no siblings, no children. For the next sibling once one why has already brought the path they share.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. First observedv0.17.1

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior. The description adds useful output truncation rules: open siblings and children are capped at eight, every blocking one is kept, the newest three notes come whole with the rest counted, and 'full' brings them all.

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 purpose is front-loaded and the description is only four sentences. The second sentence ('This is the question the whole tool exists to answer') is slightly redundant but adds emphasis; otherwise there is little waste.

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?

Given no output schema, the description covers the return content (chain, open in parallel, born from it, blocks closing) and output limits. It lacks detail on what 'blocking' means or how to interpret the chain, but is otherwise complete.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description's closing sentence reinforces the 'only' parameter's purpose, but the schema already documents that. The mention of 'full' also mirrors the schema description without adding syntax or format details beyond it.

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 states a specific purpose: it returns the chain from the goal down to a node, what is open in parallel, what was born from it, and what blocks it from closing. It is clear but does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like vivac_brief or vivac_find.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It provides a concrete usage pattern for sequential sibling queries: 'Walking siblings one after another, pass only: their shared path came with the first.' No explicit alternatives or when-not conditions are named, so it falls short of a 5.

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