Skip to main content
Glama

Garden the brain — consolidate over-grown areas (sleep-time compute)

brain_garden

Tidy an overgrown brain by consolidating dormant cards into one synthesis card per area, archiving originals and preserving all facts. Run dry-run first to review areas, then apply with the human's approval code.

Instructions

Tidy an over-grown brain WITHOUT losing anything — SMART and non-invasive: it only consolidates DORMANT cards (old + peripheral), never load-bearing ones. Two phases: call it with no apply to get the areas that have accumulated forgotten cards (deterministic: >3 cards that are older than 14 days, beyond the area's newest 8, AND have ≤1 connection — so hubs and still-referenced decisions are left untouched; Focus/Instructions/Archive/Open-questions areas protected) plus their card text; YOU write one tight synthesis per area; then call again with apply:true, syntheses:[{title, synthesis}] AND the human's 8-char approve code (apply is REFUSED without it — you are never shown the code; the human generates it with npx klypix-mcp garden-code after reviewing your plan). Each area gets a 🌿 synthesis card, the originals are stamped "⤵ consolidated", moved to Archive, and arrowed to the synthesis — nothing is deleted, and one undo un-gardens. Run it when brain_insights or the brief shows an area has grown noisy.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
applyNofalse (default) = list over-grown areas + cards to synthesize; true = consolidate using the supplied syntheses.
canvasNoBrain canvas filename/path. Defaults to the project brain ("brain").
approveNoRequired when apply:true — the 8-char human-approval code. You are never shown it: the human runs `npx klypix-mcp garden-code` and pastes the code into chat after reviewing your plan. Never guess or fabricate it.
synthesesNoRequired when apply:true — one entry per area you want consolidated.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and fully delivers: it discloses the non-invasive nature ('nothing is deleted'), deterministic selection thresholds, protected areas, the hard approval gate ('apply is REFUSED without it'), exact effects on the originals, and the one-undo un-gardening guarantee. It also warns that the agent is never shown the code, preventing fabricated approvals.

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?

The description is long, but every clause carries load-bearing operational information; the core safety promise is front-loaded and the workflow, criteria, effects, and trigger are all tightly packed. There is no filler or repetition of the schema without added context.

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?

For a complex two-phase, approval-gated mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is remarkably complete: it covers when to run, what the dry run returns, how to get approval, what apply does, what happens to the originals, and how to undo. An agent has enough to safely execute both phases.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the description adds significant phase-dependent meaning: apply=false returns areas plus card text, apply=true consumes syntheses and requires the approve code. It also ties syntheses to exact dry-run area titles and emphasizes the human-generated 8-char code, going beyond the schema's structural 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?

The description opens with a specific outcome ('Tidy an over-grown brain... consolidate') and immediately states the mechanism: it consolidates only DORMANT cards and never load-bearing ones. It clearly describes the two-phase flow and the resulting synthesis card, which distinguishes it from siblings like brain_insights, brain_connect, and brain_reconcile.

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 explicitly says when to run it: 'Run it when brain_insights or the brief shows an area has grown noisy,' and it lays out the exact two-phase dry-run-then-apply protocol. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or when-not-to-use cases, so it misses the top bar for exclusions.

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

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/dahshanlabs/klypix-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server