Casefile

by azimov777

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Local

resolve

Resolve a task remark by recording its outcome and where the work went, removing it from open remarks.

Instructions

Resolves a remark on a task: its outcome and where the work went.

Any outcome resolves the remark, needs_detail included: the resolution removes it from open_remarks, while accepted keeps it in remarks_in_work until the continuation task is closed. Its title is made of the remark reference and the outcome.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`key`	Yes	Task key `PROJECT-N`, case-insensitive; a previous key of a moved task addresses it as well. An unknown key is refused with `task_not_found`
`body`	No	Entry body in markdown, stored and returned as is. It holds what a successor needs to continue; file contents and long outputs stay outside it, represented by a pointer and the gist
`task`	No	Key of the task the work went to. Required with `accepted` and refused with any other outcome, both as `entry_fields_invalid`
`outcome`	Yes	How the remark is resolved, and what the body holds: - `fixed` — corrected at once; the body states what changed; - `accepted` — taken into work as a separate task named in `task`; - `needs_detail` — the remark needs clarification; the body holds the concrete question; - `declined` — nothing will change; the body gives the reason
`remark_no`	Yes	Number of the `remark` entry in the same task; any other number is refused with `entry_fields_invalid`
`idempotency_key`	No	Retry key chosen by the caller, e.g. a UUID. A repeat with the same key and the same arguments returns the first result and creates nothing; the same key with other arguments is refused with `idempotency_key_reused`. A key is bound to the caller's token and kept for 24 hours

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`no`	Yes	Entry number in the task's case; with the key it forms `TRK-42#12`
`seq`	Yes	Journal sequence number, usable as `after` of `wait_journal`
`title`	Yes	The title the tracker built, for entry types whose title is not sent (summary, answer, verdict, resolution, service entries); `null` when the caller sent the title
`author`	Yes
`task_key`	Yes
`created_at`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed22 schema fields changedv0.5.2Sep 25, 2026

removedInput schema / $defs

Removed value: -{
-  "RemarkOutcome": {
-    "description": "Чем разобрано замечание (`CONCEPT.md`, 3.4).\n\nСписок закрыт и покрывает все четыре судьбы претензии: поправили сразу, приняли в\nработу отдельной задачей, не поняли и ждём уточнения, менять не будем. Свободного\n«прочее» здесь нет намеренно — оно снова сделало бы исход текстом.",
-    "enum": [
-      "fixed",
-      "accepted",
-      "needs_detail",
-      "declined"
-    ],
-    "title": "RemarkOutcome",
-    "type": "string"
-  }
-}

changedInput schema / properties / body / description

Previous value: -"Тело записи в markdown; хранится и отдаётся как есть"New value: +"Entry body in markdown, stored and returned as is. It holds what a successor needs to continue; file contents and long outputs stay outside it, represented by a pointer and the gist"

changedInput schema / properties / idempotency_key / description

Previous value: -"Ключ повтора, который ты придумываешь сам (обычно UUID). Повтор вызова с тем же ключом и теми же аргументами отвечает первым результатом и второго объекта не заводит; тот же ключ с другими аргументами отклоняется. Ключ живёт в паре с твоим токеном и помнится 24 часа"New value: +"Retry key chosen by the caller, e.g. a UUID. A repeat with the same key and the same arguments returns the first result and creates nothing; the same key with other arguments is refused with `idempotency_key_reused`. A key is bound to the caller's token and kept for 24 hours"

changedInput schema / properties / key / description

Previous value: -"Ключ задачи, например `TRK-42`. Регистр не важен"New value: +"Task key `PROJECT-N`, case-insensitive; a previous key of a moved task addresses it as well. An unknown key is refused with `task_not_found`"

removedInput schema / properties / outcome / $ref
```
Removed value: -"#/$defs/RemarkOutcome"
```

changedInput schema / properties / outcome / description

Previous value: -"Чем разобрано замечание: `fixed` — поправлено сразу, `accepted` — принято в работу отдельной задачей (тогда обязателен `task`), `needs_detail` — нужно уточнение, `declined` — менять не будем, причина в теле"New value: +"How the remark is resolved, and what the body holds:\n- `fixed` — corrected at once; the body states what changed;\n- `accepted` — taken into work as a separate task named in `task`;\n- `needs_detail` — the remark needs clarification; the body holds the concrete question;\n- `declined` — nothing will change; the body gives the reason"

addedInput schema / properties / outcome / enum

Added value: +[
+  "fixed",
+  "accepted",
+  "needs_detail",
+  "declined"
+]

removedInput schema / properties / outcome / examples
```
Removed value: -[
-  "accepted"
-]
```
addedInput schema / properties / outcome / type
```
Added value: +"string"
```

changedInput schema / properties / remark_no / description

Previous value: -"Номер записи `remark` в этой же задаче"New value: +"Number of the `remark` entry in the same task; any other number is refused with `entry_fields_invalid`"

removedInput schema / properties / remark_no / examples
```
Removed value: -[
-  7
-]
```

changedInput schema / properties / task / description

Previous value: -"Ключ задачи, в которую ушла работа. Только с исходом `accepted` и там обязателен: «приняли» без адреса это обещание без ссылки"New value: +"Key of the task the work went to. Required with `accepted` and refused with any other outcome, both as `entry_fields_invalid`"

removedOutput schema / $defs / AuthorKind

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Кто именно сделал действие.\n\n`tracker` — сам трекер: этим родом подписаны служебные записи дела и строки,\nзаведённые командой первичной инициализации. У него нет подписи, потому что\nназывать себя по имени ему незачем: трекер в установке один.",
-  "enum": [
-    "agent",
-    "human",
-    "tracker"
-  ],
-  "title": "AuthorKind",
-  "type": "string"
-}

changedOutput schema / $defs / AuthorView / description

Previous value: -"Кто сделал действие: род и подпись. У самого трекера подписи нет."New value: +"Who acted: kind and signature. The tracker itself has no signature."

removedOutput schema / $defs / AuthorView / properties / kind / $ref
```
Removed value: -"#/$defs/AuthorKind"
```

addedOutput schema / $defs / AuthorView / properties / kind / description

Added value: +"Kind of author. `tracker` signs the service entries the tracker files itself"

addedOutput schema / $defs / AuthorView / properties / kind / enum
```
Added value: +[
+  "agent",
+  "human",
+  "tracker"
+]
```
addedOutput schema / $defs / AuthorView / properties / kind / type
```
Added value: +"string"
```

changedOutput schema / description

Previous value: -"Ответ подшивающего инструмента: чем запись адресуют, без самой записи.\n\n`title` непуст только там, где заголовок собрал трекер: у сводки, ответа, вердикта и\nрезолюции его не принимают вовсе (`app/domain/case.py`, `TITLED_ENTRY_TYPES`). Где\nзаголовок прислал агент, здесь стоит `null` — «в описи ровно то, что ты прислал»."New value: +"A filed entry, by its address rather than its content; the entry in full is\nreturned by `read_entries`."

addedOutput schema / properties / no / description

Added value: +"Entry number in the task's case; with the key it forms `TRK-42#12`"

addedOutput schema / properties / seq / description

Added value: +"Journal sequence number, usable as `after` of `wait_journal`"

addedOutput schema / properties / title / description

Added value: +"The title the tracker built, for entry types whose title is not sent (summary, answer, verdict, resolution, service entries); `null` when the caller sent the title"

First observedSep 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The annotations provide only basic safety hints, so the description carries the burden of behavior. It discloses key state transitions: any outcome removes the remark from open_remarks, accepted keeps it in remarks_in_work until continuation closes, and title generation rule. This goes well beyond structured data.

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, each earning its place: purpose, behavioral nuance, and title rule. Front-loaded with the core action, no filler or redundancy.

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?

The tool has moderate complexity with six parameters and outcome-dependent behavior, but the schema and output schema cover the details. The description explains the essential state effects needed to call it correctly; it does not repeat schema content. A 4 reflects that it is complete for practical use, though it could theoretically mention more about accepted-task linkage.

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 schema already documents every parameter with detail, including the outcome enum semantics and the task parameter's constraints. The description reinforces the outcome/task connection but does not add new parameter-level meaning; the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb+

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?

The description clearly identifies the context (resolving remarks) and the outcome-specific behaviors, which gives a clear sense of when to use it. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it stops short of the highest bar.

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