Skip to main content
Glama

align_get_decision_rationale

Read-only

Retrieves a decision's rationale, goals, risks, context, acceptance criteria, and prescribed actions so you can understand why it was made and what it requires.

Instructions

Retrieve the rationale, goals, risks, and context behind a specific decision, plus its acceptance criteria and actions when stored (often the concrete fix or command the decision prescribes). Use this when you need to understand WHY a decision was made - the reasoning, trade-offs, and constraints that led to it - or exactly what it requires.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "decision_id": "<decision_id>"
    },
    "name": "align_get_decision_rationale"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
decision_idYesThe decision ID to retrieve rationale for

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already confirm this is a read-only, non-destructive operation. The description adds valuable behavioral context by enumerating what is returned (rationale, goals, risks, acceptance criteria, actions) and clarifying that actions often contain a concrete fix or command.

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?

The description is two sentences and front-loads what the tool retrieves before explaining when to use it. It is efficient overall, though the parenthetical about stored actions is slightly dense.

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?

For a single-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description provides enough detail about the returned content and intended use. It does not cover response format or error cases, but those are less critical here.

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 100% and the single parameter is already documented in the schema. The description does not add syntax or format details beyond the schema's existing decision_id definition, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: retrieve the rationale, goals, risks, and context behind a specific decision. It clearly conveys what the tool returns, though it does not explicitly name sibling tools to differentiate itself.

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?

It gives clear when-to-use guidance: when you need to understand WHY a decision was made or exactly what it requires. It does not name alternative tools or state when not to use this one.

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