Skip to main content
Glama
LeandroPG19

Cuba-Memorys

by LeandroPG19
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

cuba_decreto

Record, list, and query architecture/design decisions with context, alternatives, rationale, and chosen option to preserve team reasoning.

Instructions

Record and query architecture/design decisions.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryNoSearch text (for query action)
titleNoDecision title (for record)
actionYesDecision action
chosenNoOption chosen
contextNoWhy this decision was needed
rationaleNoWhy this option was chosen
allow_secretNoRefused when the text looks like a live credential (token, password, URL with embedded creds). Set true only for a false match — the text is then stored verbatim, in clear, and reachable by search, export and every client.
alternativesNoOptions considered

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.25.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / allow_secret
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Refused when the text looks like a live credential (token, password, URL with embedded creds). Set true only for a false match — the text is then stored verbatim, in clear, and reachable by search, export and every client.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. First observedv0.18.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The schema's allow_secret description does disclose a real behavioral trait (credential detection and verbatim clear-text storage), but that appears in the schema, not the description. The description itself says nothing about persistence, secret-refusal, or that records are searchable/exportable — significant gaps for an un-annotated mutation tool.

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?

Single short sentence, front-loaded, no filler. It underspecifies rather than overexplains, so conciseness is fine even though content is thin.

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?

Eight parameters, a three-way action enum, no annotations, no output schema, and a credential-handling behavior with real safety consequences — the description should at least route between record/query/list and warn what recording persists. It doesn't, leaving the agent reliant entirely on schema text.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already documents per-field (query text, title, alternatives, allow_secret, etc.).

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a verb pair ('record and query') and resource ('architecture/design decisions'), which is clearer than a bare name. However, it doesn't distinguish itself from the sibling memory_decreto or from other memory_*/cuba_* decision-adjacent tools, leaving an agent to guess which of the 50+ siblings handles decision records.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, no mention of when to pick this over memory_decreto or cuba_cronica. The 'action' enum (record/query/list) is the only hint of use-case branching, and it lives in the schema, not the description.

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