lxDIG MCP

context_pack

Combine code, decisions, learnings, and blockers into a single task briefing using PPR-ranked retrieval.

Instructions

Build a single-call task briefing using PPR-ranked retrieval across code, decisions, learnings, and blockers

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": {
      "task": "<task>"
    },
    "name": "context_pack"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`task`	Yes	Task description
`taskId`	No	Optional task id
`agentId`	No	Agent identifier
`includeDecisions`	No	Include decision episodes
`includeEpisodes`	No	Include recent episodes
`includeLearnings`	No	Include learnings
`profile`	No	Response profile	compact

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1Jun 21, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions the retrieval method (PPR-ranked) but does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether it is read-only, authorization needs, or side effects. Basic purpose is conveyed but lacks depth.

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 a single, clear sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and method without any fluff or redundant information.

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

Completeness2/5

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

With 7 parameters and no output schema, the description fails to explain the output format (e.g., structure of the briefing) or how to use parameters like 'profile'. The complexity is high, but the description does not provide sufficient contextual completeness.

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 description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. The description does not elaborate on parameters like 'task', 'taskId', or 'profile', remaining at baseline value.

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 uses a specific verb 'Build' and resource 'single-call task briefing' with a clear method 'PPR-ranked retrieval across code, decisions, learnings, and blockers'. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like decision_query or episode_recall by offering a consolidated briefing.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool over siblings. While it implies use for a comprehensive task briefing, it does not state alternatives or when not to use it, leaving the agent with no decision support.

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