Skip to main content
Glama

Active Project

faf_context
Read-onlyIdempotent

Show or set the active project folder that all faf_* calls use by default, and optionally return its .faf text. Call once at session start to confirm context.

Instructions

Show the active project — the folder every faf_* call without a path uses — and the .faf there; pass path to make another folder the active project (your home folder and the filesystem root are refused). detail: true also returns the .faf's text. Writes no file. Call it once at the start of a session.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathNoSet active project path. If omitted, shows current context.
detailNoAlso return the text of the .faf (read with faf-cli's reader), for reading project.faf in one call

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathNoThe .faf file readers use (faf-cli's finder: the folder, then one level up), if found
activeYesAbsolute path of the active project
hasFafYesWhether a project.faf (or .faf) was found there or one level up
changedYesTrue if this call set a new context, false if it only reported
contentNodetail: true — the text of the .faf
filenameNoThe .faf filename, if found

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv6.0.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / detail
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Also return the text of the .faf (read with faf-cli's reader), for reading project.faf in one call",
      +  "type": "boolean"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / content
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "detail: true — the text of the .faf",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • changedOutput schema / properties / hasFaf / description
      Previous value: -"Whether a project.faf (or .faf) was found there"New value: +"Whether a project.faf (or .faf) was found there or one level up"
    • addedOutput schema / properties / path
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The .faf file readers use (faf-cli's finder: the folder, then one level up), if found",
      +  "type": [
      +    "string",
      +    "null"
      +  ]
      +}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv5.9.0
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "additionalProperties": true,
      +  "description": "The active project context and whether a project.faf lives there.",
      +  "properties": {
      +    "active": {
      +      "description": "Absolute path of the active project",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "changed": {
      +      "description": "True if this call set a new context, false if it only reported",
      +      "type": "boolean"
      +    },
      +    "filename": {
      +      "description": "The .faf filename, if found",
      +      "type": [
      +        "string",
      +        "null"
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "hasFaf": {
      +      "description": "Whether a project.faf (or .faf) was found there",
      +      "type": "boolean"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "required": [
      +    "active",
      +    "hasFaf",
      +    "changed"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  3. First observedv4.0.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds real beyond-annotation context: the refusal of home folder and filesystem root, the fact that path redefines the context used by all other pathless faf_* calls, and 'Writes no file.' It is slightly redundant on the read-only point.

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?

A single dense sentence-pair, front-loaded with the purpose and followed by parameter behavior and session guidance. Every clause earns its place with no 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 an output schema present, return values need no explanation. The description covers purpose, both parameters, the state effect on sibling calls, refusal conditions, and session timing — complete for a simple 0-required-param context tool.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema: path re-points the active project and has documented rejection cases, and detail:true surfaces the .faf text. These behavioral consequences go beyond the terse schema descriptions.

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 (show) and resource (the active project folder and its .faf), and clarifies the concept precisely: it is the folder every faf_* call without a path uses. This distinguishes it from siblings like faf_init or faf_about without needing schemas.

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 call it ('once at the start of a session') and when to pass path (to switch projects). It does not name an alternative sibling or state when-not-to-use, but the session-start guidance and the concept of the shared context are clear.

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