Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Claude Project History MCP Server

Claude Project History MCP Server

by MatthewDegtyar
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Claude Project History Status

cph_status
Read-onlyIdempotent

Check the MCP server's operational status by retrieving storage summary and active workflow count.

Instructions

Get overall Claude Project History status: storage summary and active workflow count.

Use this to check that the plugin is working, not to get project context. For project context, use cph_session_init.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "cph_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.6.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds context about the return values (storage summary and active workflow count), which goes beyond annotations but does not describe any additional behavioral traits.

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 two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states purpose, the second gives usage guidance. It is front-loaded and concise.

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 tool has no parameters and no output schema, the description is complete: it explains the purpose, return values, and usage context. There are no gaps.

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?

The input schema has no parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter semantics. It implies the tool takes no input, which is correct.

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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'Claude Project History status' and specifies the output as 'storage summary and active workflow count'. It distinguishes from sibling tools by explicitly stating it is not for project context and points to cph_session_init for that.

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 description explicitly states when to use ('check that the plugin is working') and when not to use ('not to get project context') along with the alternative tool (cph_session_init).

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