Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Krv-Labs

topos-mcp

by Krv-Labs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

topos_assess_worktree_change

Read-onlyIdempotent

Assess an in-place edit against a git revision — the common refactor loop. Stateless: the baseline is read from git (git show <baseline_ref>:<path>, default HEAD) and compared to the current working-tree file. No prior call required.

Instructions

Assess an in-place edit against a git revision — the common refactor loop. Stateless: the baseline is read from git (git show <baseline_ref>:<path>, default HEAD) and compared to the current working-tree file. No prior call required. For untracked/new files or an uncommitted pre-edit baseline, use topos_begin_refactor + topos_assess_snapshot. Do not call if you have not edited the file. A no-change result on a passing file has no next_tool.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
allowNoOne-off acknowledged dangerous-call patterns.
filepathYesEdited file path.
preferencesNoOptional generator ranking.
baseline_refNoGit baseline ref.HEAD
gitnexus_dirNo.gitnexus directory.
include_security_findingsNoInclude SECURE findings.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.11.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / gitnexus_dir / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / gitnexus_dir / description
      Added value: +".gitnexus directory."
    • removedInput schema / properties / gitnexus_dir / type
      Removed value: -[
-  "string",
-  "null"
-]
  2. Changed5 schema fields changedv0.5.0
    • changedInput schema / $defs / GeneratorInput / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "simple",
-  "composable",
-  "secure"
-]New value: +[
+  "simple",
+  "composable",
+  "secure",
+  "navigable"
+]
    • changedInput schema / $defs / LatticeElement / description
      Previous value: -"The 8 elements of the free Heyting algebra H(G_qual) on the three\ngenerators SIMPLE, COMPOSABLE, SECURE, mirroring `EvaluationValue` on\nthe MCP wire."New value: +"The 16 elements of the free Heyting algebra H(G_qual) on the four\ngenerators SIMPLE, COMPOSABLE, SECURE, NAVIGABLE, mirroring\n`EvaluationValue` on the MCP wire.\n\nNote for clients pinned to the pre-v0.5.0 shape: `IDEAL` now requires\nall four pillars. The verdict that used to be `IDEAL` — the top of the\nthree-generator algebra — serializes as `SIMPLE_COMPOSABLE_SECURE`.\nVariants are declared in **bitmask order**, matching\n`EvaluationValue::ALL`, so the two enums convert by position. Serde\nkeys on variant names, so this ordering is an implementation detail\nand not part of the wire contract."
    • changedInput schema / $defs / LatticeElement / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "SLOP",
-  "SIMPLE",
-  "COMPOSABLE",
-  "SECURE",
-  "SIMPLE_COMPOSABLE",
-  "SIMPLE_SECURE",
-  "COMPOSABLE_SECURE",
-  "IDEAL"
-]New value: +[
+  "SLOP",
+  "SIMPLE",
+  "COMPOSABLE",
+  "SIMPLE_COMPOSABLE",
+  "SECURE",
+  "SIMPLE_SECURE",
+  "COMPOSABLE_SECURE",
+  "SIMPLE_COMPOSABLE_SECURE",
+  "NAVIGABLE",
+  "SIMPLE_NAVIGABLE",
+  "COMPOSABLE_NAVIGABLE",
+  "SIMPLE_COMPOSABLE_NAVIGABLE",
+  "SECURE_NAVIGABLE",
+  "SIMPLE_SECURE_NAVIGABLE",
+  "COMPOSABLE_SECURE_NAVIGABLE",
+  "IDEAL"
+]
    • changedInput schema / $defs / UserPreferencesInput / description
      Previous value: -"Strict ranking over simple, composable, and secure."New value: +"Strict ranking over simple, composable, secure, and navigable."
    • changedInput schema / $defs / UserPreferencesInput / properties / ranking / description
      Previous value: -"Permutation of simple/composable/secure, best first."New value: +"Permutation of simple/composable/secure/navigable, best first."
  3. Addedv0.4.0
  4. Removedv0.4.0-rc
  5. First observedv0.3.6

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the bar is lower, but the description adds real behavioral context: the tool is stateless, the baseline is read via 'git show <baseline_ref>:<path>' defaulting to HEAD, no prior call is needed, and a no-change result on a passing file yields no next_tool. It stops short of describing return shape or how findings are structured.

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?

Four tight sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, then the stateless mechanism, then the alternative path, then the guardrail. Every sentence carries distinct information with no repetition of the name or title.

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 read-only, parameter-heavy assessment tool with no output schema, the description covers invocation prerequisites, baseline resolution, and the empty-result case. The main residual gap is what an assessment result contains (findings, verdict shape, next_tool semantics), though the mention of next_tool partially mitigates this.

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 genuinely enriches the most consequential parameter: it explains that baseline_ref is resolved via git show against the working-tree file and defaults to HEAD, and that filepath must refer to an already-edited file. That is more than the schema's terse 'Git baseline ref.'

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+resource+scope: 'Assess an in-place edit against a git revision — the common refactor loop.' It distinguishes itself from siblings by naming topos_begin_refactor and topos_assess_snapshot as the tools for untracked/new-file or pre-edit-baseline cases, so an agent can route correctly without opening schemas.

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?

Explicit when-to-use (in-place edit vs git revision), when-not ('Do not call if you have not edited the file'), and the exact alternative path for untracked/new files or an uncommitted pre-edit baseline. It also sets expectations for the no-change case.

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