Skip to main content
Glama

umlforge_living_docs

Read-only

Update existing Mermaid diagrams to reflect sprint or PR changes; produce changelog-annotated diffs, new diagrams, and evolution notes.

Instructions

Update diagrams you already have to reflect what changed in a sprint or PR.

USE THIS WHEN:

  • You ALREADY HAVE Mermaid diagrams (from a previous generation or your own)

  • Code has changed in a sprint or PR and your diagrams are now out of date

  • You want a changelog-annotated diff of your diagrams

NOT FOR:

  • Generating diagrams for the first time ? use umlforge_reverse_engineer (for existing codebases) or umlforge_stakeholder_arch (for new designs)

  • Analysing a GitHub URL ? use umlforge_reverse_engineer instead

  • Generating diagrams without existing ones to update ? use any other tool

IMPORTANT: current_diagrams is REQUIRED ? paste your existing Mermaid diagrams (including the ```mermaid fences). This tool cannot generate from scratch.

Produces:

  • Updated diagrams for affected sections only (with %% changelog headers)

  • New diagrams for newly introduced patterns

  • Architecture evolution note for pasting into a wiki

  • (report_mode=True) Documentation Analysis Notes: change impact, drift risks, coverage quick wins

Args: current_diagrams: Your existing Mermaid diagram(s) ? paste the full content including ```mermaid fences. REQUIRED. sprint_changes: What changed this sprint: new components, removed flows, renamed services, modified behaviour. affected_files: Files or modules touched in this sprint/PR (optional). report_mode: True ? also produce Documentation Analysis Notes. Pro/Team/Enterprise only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
report_modeNo
affected_filesNo
sprint_changesYes
current_diagramsYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.9

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already supply the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true), and the description adds non-obvious constraints on top: current_diagrams is REQUIRED and the tool cannot generate from scratch, output is limited to affected sections with %% changelog headers, and report_mode is gated to Pro/Team/Enterprise. It does not discuss how the diff is computed or failure modes on malformed Mermaid input.

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?

Long but deliberately sectioned with headers and front-loaded purpose; nearly every line carries actionable information. The trailing 'Produces' list partially overlaps the output schema, which is the only mild redundancy.

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 4-parameter generative tool with an output schema, the definition covers prerequisites, scope, alternatives, artifacts, and gating. Nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly is missing.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden and does so: all four parameters are documented with meaning, both required params are marked REQUIRED, and it specifies paste format ('including the ```mermaid fences') plus the tier restriction on report_mode.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource ('Update diagrams you already have to reflect what changed in a sprint or PR'), and explicitly names the sibling tools it is not (umlforge_reverse_engineer, umlforge_stakeholder_arch). An agent can distinguish it from all 13 siblings without opening a schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The USE THIS WHEN / NOT FOR blocks give explicit triggers and explicit exclusions, and route each excluded case to a named alternative tool. This is about as complete as routing guidance gets.

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