Skip to main content
Glama

Generate Modular Architecture Logic

ink_generate_script_logic
Read-onlyIdempotent

Generate zero-dependency JavaScript or TypeScript modules for state stores, event buses, scroll observers, theme toggles, and form validators, with built-in memory cleanup and error boundaries.

Instructions

PURPOSE: Generate zero-dependency, memory-safe JavaScript and TypeScript architectural modules (State Store, Event Bus, Intersection Scroll Observer, Theme Switcher, Form Validator) with production error boundaries.

BEHAVIOR: Synthesizes modular ES6+ JavaScript and optional TypeScript declarations purely in-memory. Zero filesystem modifications. All generated code enforces memory cleanup paradigms (explicit unsubscribe functions, WeakMap caching, EventTarget/listener teardown).

USAGE GUIDELINES:

  • When to use: Use when creating application state management, event-driven decoupled messaging, viewport scroll animators, theme togglers, or accessible form validation.

  • When NOT to use: Do NOT use to render UI elements or write component styling (use ink_craft_component instead) or WebGL graphics (use ink_build_threejs_experience instead).

  • Alternatives: Use ink_craft_component for visual UI components; use ink_build_threejs_experience for 3D canvas rendering.

RETURNS: ResultEnvelope containing zero-dependency ES module 'code', optional 'typescriptTypes', architectural pattern documentation, and executable 'usageExample'.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
patternNoArchitectural runtime pattern: 'state-store' (pub/sub state container), 'event-bus' (typed decoupled messaging), 'scroll-observer' (IntersectionObserver animator), 'theme-toggle' (dark/light/system theme switcher with persistence), 'form-validator' (real-time accessible field validation)state-store
moduleNameNoName of the exported JavaScript/TypeScript class or moduleAppStore
typescriptNoWhen true, emits strict TypeScript interfaces and generic typings alongside the implementation

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesDomain-specific typed payload returned by the tool
statusYesExecution outcome status
summaryYesConcise, human-readable executive summary of the tool outcome
evidenceNoAudit trail, source references, and generated artifact locations
warningsYesOperational cautions, craft advice, or non-blocking warnings
nextActionsNoActionable sequential recommendations or subsequent tool suggestions

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.2.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, and the description complements them with concrete behavioral detail: 'purely in-memory', 'Zero filesystem modifications', and memory cleanup guarantees like 'explicit unsubscribe functions, WeakMap caching, EventTarget/listener teardown'. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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?

The description is well-structured with PURPOSE, BEHAVIOR, USAGE GUIDELINES, and RETURNS sections. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, and every section earns its place by covering invocation context, safety behavior, and output shape without fluff.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the output schema exists, all parameters are optional with default values, and the description documents the return envelope ('ResultEnvelope containing zero-dependency ES module code, optional typescriptTypes, architectural pattern documentation, and executable usageExample'), an agent has everything needed to invoke the tool correctly. Sibling routing and side-effect behavior are also covered.

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 input schema already fully documents all three parameters with defaults and descriptions. The tool description restates the architectural patterns but does not add significant meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Generate zero-dependency, memory-safe JavaScript and TypeScript architectural modules' followed by an explicit list of module patterns. It clearly differentiates from siblings by naming ink_craft_component and ink_build_threejs_experience as the tools for UI and WebGL, so an agent can select the correct tool.

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?

The USAGE GUIDELINES section explicitly specifies when to use the tool, when NOT to use it, and names exact alternatives (ink_craft_component, ink_build_threejs_experience). This is the strongest possible routing guidance: both inclusion and exclusion criteria are stated.

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