Draugr

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

propose_saga

Generate a YAML Saga descriptor for a directory from its dependency files, infrastructure code, and Dockerfiles without writing anything, so users can review the proposal and decide where to save it.

Instructions

Return the Saga descriptor draugr init would write for a directory, as YAML, with the controls its dependency files, infrastructure code and Dockerfiles call for. Call this when a project has no descriptor, before writing one from get_saga_schema. It writes nothing; show the proposal to the user, who decides whether and where to save it.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`path`	No	the directory to propose a descriptor for, absolute or relative to the directory the server was started in; defaults to that directory
`perDirectory`	No	one component per directory that holds its own dependency file, and a root component for the rest of the tree

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`note`	No
`path`	Yes	the file to save the descriptor as; its repository URLs are relative to this directory
`saga`	Yes	the descriptor draugr init would write for this directory, as YAML, with a comment naming the files behind each scanner it enables
`warning`	No
`controls`	No
`existing`	No	descriptors already in this directory; the project's committed scope, which this proposal does not replace
`components`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 25, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and clearly states that the tool writes nothing and only returns a proposal. It also explains the intended user-review workflow, though it does not detail file-read permissions or failure behavior.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by usage and safety context. Every sentence contributes distinct information with no repetition.

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?

The description is complete for this tool given the rich input schema and the presence of an output schema. It covers purpose, usage condition, side-effect profile, and user workflow without needing to restate return structure.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters, including `path` and `perDirectory`. The description adds only general context about proposing for a directory and does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: return the Saga descriptor `draugr init` would write for a directory, as YAML. It distinguishes this from writing a descriptor and names the sibling tool `get_saga_schema`, so the agent can tell what this tool is and is not.

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?

It gives an explicit usage condition: call this when a project has no descriptor, before writing one from `get_saga_schema`. It also tells the agent what to do with the result: show the proposal to the user, who decides whether and where to save it.

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

Deploy Server