Skip to main content
Glama
WSattazahn

caveat-lang

by WSattazahn
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

caveat_dependents

Read-onlyIdempotent

Find what depends on a named evidence item, reading stream, or caveat after replaying events. Inspect impact by tracing grounds and possible influence.

Instructions

Replay optional events and find what rests on one named evidence item, reading stream or caveat. Use for impact inspection; caveat_explain instead explains all decisions and their reasons. report (caveat-dependents/0.1) includes subject, kind, sequence, event outcomes, claims, decisions, changes, values, displayed values and withdrawal records; dependency entries distinguish grounds from possible influence through lineage. exitCode: 0 replay completed (may include rejected events); 1 fatal event with last good state; 2 load failure or unknown subject, with report.error. Returns the same JSON in structuredContent and text: {schema:"caveat-authoring/0.1",operation,sourceSha256,runtime,exitCode,report}. Read exitCode even when isError is false. Bridge failures instead set isError:true with {schema:"caveat-authoring-error/0.1",error:{kind,message}}.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
eventsNoEvents replayed in array order from a fresh session. Omitted or [] inspects the initial state; previous calls supply no history. Rejections are recorded and replay continues; a fatal event stops replay at the last good snapshot. At most 1,000 entries and 1 MiB of serialized UTF-8 JSON.
sourceYesComplete inline Caveat program text, available as the virtual file inline.cav. No file path or URL lookup. At most 1 MiB of UTF-8 source; each call uses a fresh runtime.
subjectYesExact case-sensitive evidence name, reading stream name, caveat name, or evidence occurrence ID after replay. Evidence records supplied observations; a reading stream is a named history of samples; a caveat is a qualification on evidence. For example, probe selects its evidence/readings, values selects a stream, and values@1 selects one recorded reading. Use a name from source or caveat_explain; not a file path, claim or decision name. Unknown names return exitCode 2.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changedv0.1.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / events / description
      Added value: +"Events replayed in array order from a fresh session. Omitted or [] inspects the initial state; previous calls supply no history. Rejections are recorded and replay continues; a fatal event stops replay at the last good snapshot. At most 1,000 entries and 1 MiB of serialized UTF-8 JSON."
    • addedInput schema / properties / events / items / description
      Added value: +"One event to dispatch to the supplied program, for example {\"event\":\"read\",\"payload\":{\"value\":85}} when source declares read with a value parameter."
    • addedInput schema / properties / events / items / properties / event / description
      Added value: +"Event name declared in source, such as read or assess. Supply the name only, without Caveat syntax."
    • addedInput schema / properties / events / items / properties / payload / description
      Added value: +"Values keyed by the event parameter names declared in source, for example {\"value\":85}. Omit for an empty payload ({}). The runtime checks parameter names, types and declared bounds."
    • changedInput schema / properties / source / description
      Previous value: -"Inline Caveat source; no file or URL lookup."New value: +"Complete inline Caveat program text, available as the virtual file inline.cav. No file path or URL lookup. At most 1 MiB of UTF-8 source; each call uses a fresh runtime."
    • addedInput schema / properties / subject / description
      Added value: +"Exact case-sensitive evidence name, reading stream name, caveat name, or evidence occurrence ID after replay. Evidence records supplied observations; a reading stream is a named history of samples; a caveat is a qualification on evidence. For example, probe selects its evidence/readings, values selects a stream, and values@1 selects one recorded reading. Use a name from source or caveat_explain; not a file path, claim or decision name. Unknown names return exitCode 2."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations by disclosing exitCode semantics (0 replay completed, 1 fatal with last good state, 2 load failure/unknown subject), the report contents, and the fact that isError:false can still carry a non-zero exitCode, plus the separate bridge-failure error schema. This is exactly the extra context annotations cannot supply.

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?

Purpose and the sibling alternative are front-loaded in the first two sentences, and each subsequent sentence carries real operational detail. It is dense and long for a single paragraph, which costs a point, but nothing is pure filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the full return contract — the JSON envelope, report fields, exitCode meanings, and the error shape — and adds the non-obvious caveat that exitCode must be read even when isError is false. Nothing needed to call or interpret it is missing.

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 schema already documents source, subject and events in detail, including payload keying and limits. The description adds only the loose hint that subject may be an evidence name, reading stream, or caveat, which the schema states more fully — baseline 3 is right.

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 — replay events and find what rests on one named evidence item — and names the subject kinds it accepts (evidence, reading stream, caveat). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling caveat_explain, so an agent can route without opening either schema.

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?

Gives the use case ('impact inspection') and names the alternative plus the condition that selects it: caveat_explain explains all decisions and their reasons. The when-not is covered by contrast with that sibling.

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