Skip to main content
Glama
arctop

Seamless

by arctop
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Go
Local

gardener_proposals

Read-onlyIdempotent

List pending memory-maintenance proposals to merge duplicates, archive stale items, digest sessions, reproject or rekind memories, and fix plans. Read-only; review and apply or dismiss each.

Instructions

List pending gardener proposals (merge/consolidate duplicate memories, archive stale memories, write a monthly session digest, reproject a memory to another project, rekind a memory to a different kind, set up a project split, abandon a never-approved captured plan, fold a stranded captured plan into the composition that carries its steps, write a memory agents keep searching for in vain, or fix an error agents keep hitting). Review, then apply, dismiss or hide each with gardener_apply. Read-only.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindNofilter by proposal kind (default: all pending)
sessionNothe session to act as: the name session_start returned, the cc/<id> or cx/<id> on your briefing's 'Seam session' line, or a session ULID. It scopes and credits this call. Defaults to this connection's session; pass it on every call when session_start reports the connection as stateless

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.7.4
    • addedInput schema / properties / session
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "the session to act as: the name session_start returned, the cc/<id> or cx/<id> on your briefing's 'Seam session' line, or a session ULID. It scopes and credits this call. Defaults to this connection's session; pass it on every call when session_start reports the connection as stateless",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.4.11
    • changedInput schema / properties / kind / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "merge",
-  "archive",
-  "digest",
-  "consolidate",
-  "reproject",
-  "split",
-  "abandon_plan",
-  "memory_wanted",
-  "tool_error",
-  "rekind",
-  "ship_plan"
-]New value: +[
+  "merge",
+  "archive",
+  "digest",
+  "consolidate",
+  "reproject",
+  "split",
+  "abandon_plan",
+  "memory_wanted",
+  "tool_error",
+  "rekind",
+  "ship_plan",
+  "relocate",
+  "merge_plans"
+]
  3. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so 'Read-only' is restated structured data and earns no credit. What the description does add is the taxonomy of what a pending proposal can contain, which is genuine behavioral context about the payload, but it says nothing about ordering, volume, pagination, or whether applying is reversible.

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?

Front-loaded: the verb+resource landing in the first four words, and the read-only/routing sentence closes it. The middle parenthetical is long, but each clause defines a distinct proposal kind rather than padding, so it carries information density without much waste.

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 zero-required-parameter read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers what is returned conceptually (the set of proposal kinds) and what to do next. It omits return-shape details such as ordering or whether results are paged, which is the only notable gap and a modest one at that.

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 the baseline is 3, but the prose parenthetical explains the meaning of nearly every value in the 'kind' enum (merge/consolidate duplicate memories, archive stale memories, reproject, rekind, ship_plan) beyond the schema's bare enum list, adding real semantic value for the main filtering parameter.

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 ('List pending gardener proposals') and then enumerates the heterogeneous proposal kinds an agent will actually see (merge, archive, digest, reproject, split, abandon_plan, etc.), so the name's abstract noun 'proposals' is concretized. It also implicitly separates itself from the write-side siblings (gardener_apply, gardener_request, gardener_split).

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?

Gives a clear workflow: 'Review, then apply, dismiss or hide each with gardener_apply', naming the follow-up tool and the three actions available on each item. It does not state when to prefer gardener_request or gardener_split over this tool, but the review-then-act funnel is explicit.

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