Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
memory-bank-mcp

memory-bank-mcp

by diaz3618
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

log_decision

Records decisions with context, alternatives, and consequences to preserve project history and rationale across sessions.

Instructions

Log a decision in the decision log

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": {
      "title": "<title>",
      "context": "<context>",
      "decision": "<decision>"
    },
    "name": "log_decision"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleYesDecision title
contextYesDecision context
decisionYesThe decision made
alternativesNoAlternatives considered
consequencesNoConsequences of the decision

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.3.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must describe behavioral traits. It fails to disclose any side effects, persistence behavior, or required state. The minimal description offers no transparency beyond the basic action.

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 extremely concise at 6 words, with no wasted content. It front-loads the core purpose. However, it is so brief that it may sacrifice clarity for brevity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool has 5 parameters, 3 required, and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not explain the tool's integration, output, or any contextual details needed to use it effectively.

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?

The input schema covers all 5 parameters with descriptions, achieving 100% coverage. The tool description adds no additional meaning or examples beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline without adding value.

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 clearly indicates the action (log) and resource (decision/decision log), distinguishing it from sibling tools like add_progress_entry or add_session_note. However, it could be more specific about the scope and purpose of the decision log.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool compared to alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites, limitations, or exclusions. The agent is left to infer usage from context.

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