Skip to main content
Glama
dreamforgestudiollc

EMET

by dreamforgestudiollc
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

rename_doc

Reissue an existing document under a new document ID without deleting the original; mark the old ID retired with a reason and hide it from listings.

Instructions

Reissue a continuity document under a new doc_id. The destination is written first through the normal write path (same redaction, digest, versioning and sha256 read-back), and only then is the old id marked obsolete with retire_doc. NOTHING IS DELETED: the old id keeps its content and stays readable at its own id, flagged retired with the reason 'Reissued as ', and hidden from list_docs. No tombstone document is needed, because the retired original IS the tombstone and it still carries the real content. Refuses if the destination already exists, because a rename onto an occupied id is a merge decision and merges are not guessed.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
new_idYesDestination document id. Must not already exist.
old_idYesExisting document id to reissue from. It is retired, not removed.
reasonYesWhy the document is reissued. Required, at least 10 characters.
sourceNoSource tag - which host produced this write. One name on every write since 2026-09-27.
exchangeNoThe exchange (turn) this write belongs to, counting from 1. A write for exchange n while exchange n-1 was never appended is refused by the session graph until n-1 is appended.
session_idNoTranscript session id.
updated_byNoAlias of `source` (the older name, kept one release). Prefer `source`.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.2.2
    • changedInput schema / properties / exchange / description
      Previous value: -"The exchange (turn) this write belongs to, counting from 1. A write for exchange n while exchange n-1 was never appended is flagged by the session graph."New value: +"The exchange (turn) this write belongs to, counting from 1. A write for exchange n while exchange n-1 was never appended is refused by the session graph until n-1 is appended."
    • addedInput schema / properties / reason
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Why the document is reissued. Required, at least 10 characters.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / session_id / description
      Previous value: -"Your transcript session id from emet_session_open. The session graph reads this session's state before the write and returns `session_graph.next` - the next step."New value: +"Transcript session id."
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "old_id",
-  "new_id"
-]New value: +[
+  "old_id",
+  "new_id",
+  "reason"
+]
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Far exceeds the annotations: it specifies the write ordering (destination written first, then retire_doc), that NOTHING IS DELETED, that the old id stays readable and is flagged retired with a reason, that it is hidden from list_docs, and the merge-refusal rule. The destructiveHint=false annotation is corroborated and richly explained rather than merely restated.

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?

Front-loads the core action and ordering before elaborating on the retire semantics and refusal rule; every sentence carries information. It runs slightly long, and the tombstone sentence is somewhat redundant with the preceding NOTHING IS DELETED clause.

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?

With no output schema, the description covers the mutation's effects, ordering, and refusal behavior thoroughly for a 7-parameter write tool. It leaves the source/exchange/session_id write-path parameters to the schema, which is reasonable given their full descriptions there.

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%, so the schema already documents all seven parameters. The description reinforces new_id/old_id semantics (destination must not exist; old id is retired, not removed) but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, which is the expected baseline.

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?

States a precise verb+resource ('Reissue a continuity document under a new doc_id') and immediately frames it against the related retire_doc operation. An agent can distinguish it from write_doc, retire_doc, and patch_doc 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 Guidelines4/5

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

Explains the operational context clearly (reissue an existing doc under a new id) and names an explicit refusal condition (destination already exists, because that would be a merge decision). It does not spell out when to prefer this over, say, patch_doc or write_doc, but the context is unambiguous.

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