Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ChatGPT Context Bridge

ChatGPT Context Bridge

by howdycarter
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Stage Chat Export

stage_chat
Idempotent

Stage ChatGPT conversations for review: read local exports or markdown files, redact sensitive information, classify content, and write staging artifacts without writing to Homebase or Notion.

Instructions

Read a local ChatGPT export JSON or manual markdown chat file, redact sensitive values, classify it, and write only staging artifacts. Does not write to Homebase or Notion.

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": {
      "source_path": "<source_path>"
    },
    "name": "stage_chat"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tagsNoPrivate routing tags to attach to staged records.
source_pathYesPath to a ChatGPT conversations.json export or manual markdown chat file.
source_typeNoParser to use. auto chooses JSON or markdown from file extension.auto
allow_overwriteNoWhether to overwrite an existing staged record with the same source hash.
redaction_levelNostandard redacts secrets/contact data; strict also redacts street addresses.standard
response_formatNoOutput format: markdown or json.markdown

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate write (readOnlyHint=false), idempotent (idempotentHint=true), and non-destructive (destructiveHint=false). The description adds valuable context about reading local files, redaction, classification, and the staging-only write scope, which enriches the agent's understanding without contradicting 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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and contains no redundant or superfluous information. Every phrase contributes to understanding the tool's function and scope.

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?

Given 6 parameters, no output schema, and complexity around redaction/classification, the description covers the main workflow and exclusions. It does not elaborate on classification details or artifact specifics, but with good annotations, this is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 all parameters are well documented in the input schema. The description gives a general overview but does not add specific parameter details beyond what the schema already provides. It meets the baseline but does not go further.

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 clearly states the tool reads local chat export files, redacts sensitive values, classifies them, and writes staging artifacts. It explicitly distinguishes itself from siblings by noting it does not write to Homebase or Notion, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

The description provides clear context for when to use the tool: for staging chat data without writing to Homebase or Notion. It implies when not to use (when final writes are needed) and explicitly mentions the exclusion. However, it does not name alternative sibling tools explicitly, so it falls short of a 5.

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