Skip to main content
Glama
duckAsteroid

brindley

by duckAsteroid
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

create

File a new initiative ticket or issue in a git repository. It assigns a collision-free number by scanning branches, worktrees, and history, and marks a folder path as a collection if needed.

Instructions

Create a new initiative (ticket/issue). The number is coined automatically by scanning the working tree, other worktrees, branches and history. A folder path that isn't a collection yet is marked as one. A milestone this reaches, or stops being reached, is reported under milestones.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
whyNoWhy the dependencies are needed (appended to each depends_on bullet; related links get no note — add one with set_dependencies)
goalNo
tagsNo
typeNofeature, bug, refactor, perf, docs, chore, spike, …
ownerNo
titleYes
relatedNoInitiatives or URLs to link under ## Related (non-blocking)
collectionYesCollection name, or a folder path
depends_onNoInitiatives (e.g. "lgm#22", 23) or ticket URLs to link under ## Dependencies

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv2.6.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / depends_on / description
      Added value: +"Initiatives (e.g. \"lgm#22\", 23) or ticket URLs to link under ## Dependencies"
    • addedInput schema / properties / related / description
      Added value: +"Initiatives or URLs to link under ## Related (non-blocking)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / why
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Why the dependencies are needed (appended to each depends_on bullet; related links get no note — add one with set_dependencies)",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose non-obvious behavior: the number is auto-coined by scanning the working tree, other worktrees, branches and history; a folder path is promoted to a collection; milestone changes are reported. It omits write side effects, permissions, and failure modes, but the disclosed behavior is substantively more than the empty annotation set provides.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the verb+resource, and no filler. The milestone sentence is slightly tangential to creation but does convey return behavior, so it earns its place.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a 9-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is only partially sufficient: it explains numbering and milestone reporting, but leaves the majority of parameters and any error/write semantics unexplained. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 56% and the description adds almost nothing about the 9 parameters — it never explains why, goal, tags, type, owner, related, or depends_on. The only parameter-adjacent statement ('a folder path that isn't a collection yet is marked as one') loosely maps to collection but does not compensate for the undocumented half of the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Create a new initiative (ticket/issue)', which cleanly separates it from the sibling create_collection. It does not, however, explicitly name or contrast with that sibling, so it stops just short of full differentiation.

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?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given, and no alternatives (create_collection, batch_update) are named. The agent must infer that this is the ticket-creation entry point purely from the phrase 'ticket/issue'.

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