Skip to main content
Glama
fbwndrud

vibelore

by fbwndrud
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

lore_arc_review

Re-reads written chapters in the current arc through a 5-chapter checkpoint or ending, then rebuilds per-chapter pattern ledgers and a seven-dimension arc quality review without editing manuscript.

Instructions

현재 아크에서 이미 쓴 화들을 5화 단위 체크포인트 또는 종결화까지 다시 읽고, 화별 PatternLedger와 아크 품질 리뷰(7개 차원 점수·발견 사항)를 새로 만든다. lore_write가 체크포인트마다 같은 리뷰를 자동으로 하므로 선택 도구이며, 리뷰를 수동으로 갱신하거나 다시 보고 싶을 때만 쓴다. 결과는 advisory이고 원고를 고치지 않는다. .vibelore/experience-ledger.json·pattern-ledger.json과 arc-reviews/를 덮어쓴다. 화마다 한 번, 마지막에 한 번 status=needs_model이 나온다(N+1회). 체크포인트가 아닌 화나 본문이 없는 화를 지정하면 오류.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
workIdYes작품 식별자 ([A-Za-z0-9_-]). 한 디렉터리에는 작품 하나만 둔다.
projectNo작품 디렉터리의 절대 경로. 생략하면 서버 실행 디렉터리.
throughChapterNo평가 종료 화(아크 5·10·15화째 또는 마지막 화). 생략하면 현재 아크의 마지막 작성 화이며, 그 화가 체크포인트가 아니면 오류.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.4.4
    • changedInput schema / properties / throughChapter / description
      Previous value: -"평가 종료 화. 생략하면 현재 아크의 마지막 작성 화."New value: +"평가 종료 화(아크 5·10·15화째 또는 마지막 화). 생략하면 현재 아크의 마지막 작성 화이며, 그 화가 체크포인트가 아니면 오류."
    • changedInput schema / properties / workId / description
      Previous value: -"작품 식별자 ([A-Za-z0-9_-])."New value: +"작품 식별자 ([A-Za-z0-9_-]). 한 디렉터리에는 작품 하나만 둔다."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With annotations covering mutation safety (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description adds rich behavioral context: it overwrites .vibelore/experience-ledger.json, pattern-ledger.json, and arc-reviews/, does not modify the manuscript, and emits status=needs_model N+1 times. It also discloses error cases. This goes well beyond the annotations.

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?

The description is dense but front-loaded: purpose first, then the lore_write relationship, then side effects, execution statuses, and errors. Every sentence contributes relevant information and none is redundant.

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 mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the key gaps: what artifacts are overwritten, what is not changed, what status signals occur, and what inputs cause errors. An agent has enough to call it correctly in context.

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 workId, project, and throughChapter, including the checkpoint rule for throughChapter. The description reinforces the checkpoint concept and error behavior but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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+resource: reread written chapters in the current arc and regenerate per-chapter PatternLedger and an arc quality review. It distinguishes the tool from the sibling lore_write by explaining that lore_write performs the same review automatically, making this optional. An agent can identify what this tool does without opening the 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?

It explicitly says when to use this tool: only when manually updating or re-viewing reviews, because lore_write already does it at each checkpoint. It also gives error conditions (non-checkpoint chapter or chapter without body). No alternative-selection inference is needed.

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