Datacron

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Append to memory note

append_journal

Append a Markdown entry under a heading in an existing memory note to extend a topic without duplicating it; writes atomically to confined paths.

Instructions

Use this when new information extends a topic that already has a note, instead of creating a duplicate. Append a Markdown entry under a heading in an existing memory note; the entry goes after the heading's own content, before its first subsection. This is a write operation: it is confined to DATACRON_WRITE_PATHS, stores content-addressed history, writes atomically, and relies on the MCP client's tool approval for human-in-the-loop review.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`entry`	Yes
`heading`	Yes
`rel_path`	Yes
`request_id`	No
`expected_hash`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`indexed`	Yes
`appended`	No
`rel_path`	No
`replayed`	No
`committed`	No
`content_hash`	Yes
`operation_id`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed6 schema fields changedv0.1.17Oct 17, 2026
- addedOutput schema / description
```
Added value: +"Successful ``append_journal`` payload."
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / appended / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / committed / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / operation_id / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / rel_path / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / replayed / default
```
Removed value: -null
```

Changed9 schema fields changedv0.1.5Sep 5, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / request_id

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Request Id"
+}

removedOutput schema / properties / appended / $ref
```
Removed value: -"#/$defs/AppendedNoteOutput"
```

addedOutput schema / properties / appended / anyOf

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "$ref": "#/$defs/AppendedNoteOutput"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]

addedOutput schema / properties / appended / default
```
Added value: +null
```

addedOutput schema / properties / committed

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Committed"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / operation_id

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Operation Id"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / rel_path

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Rel Path"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / replayed

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Replayed"
+}

changedOutput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "appended",
-  "content_hash",
-  "indexed"
-]New value: +[
+  "content_hash",
+  "indexed"
+]

First observedv0.1.0Jul 31, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare the basic safety profile (not read-only, not destructive, not idempotent, closed-world). The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: writes are confined to DATACRON_WRITE_PATHS, history is content-addressed, writes are atomic, and human review comes via the MCP client's tool approval. It also pins down the exact placement semantics within the target section.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the selection condition, then the mechanics, then the behavioral guarantees. No filler, and each sentence carries distinct information.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, and the annotations plus the description's write-path, atomicity and approval notes make the mutation profile clear. The remaining gap is the two optional parameters, which neither the schema nor the description explains.

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 0% across 5 parameters, so the description must carry the load. It implies the roles of rel_path, heading and entry through the placement narrative, but leaves request_id and expected_hash completely unexplained, and given the mention of content-addressed history these are likely the idempotency/concurrency controls an agent needs to understand.

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 and resource ('Append a Markdown entry ... in an existing memory note') and names the exact insertion point (after the heading's own content, before its first subsection). This is clearly distinguishable from create_note_ai and the patch_note_* siblings, which modify other parts of a note.

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?

Explicitly says when to use it: 'when new information extends a topic that already has a note, instead of creating a duplicate.' That gives the selecting condition and rules out the duplicate-creation path, though it doesn't name create_note_ai directly or state when-not to use this tool.

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