Skip to main content
Glama
lockstep-team-agent

lockstep

by lockstep-team-agent
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

register_dependency

Declare that a repo consumes an API surface (e.g., http:GET /orders/:id) so changes to it are delivered to that repo; optionally name the producing repo to map dependencies.

Instructions

Declare that this repo consumes a surface (for example http:GET /orders/:id), so changes to that surface are delivered to this repo. producedRepoId optionally names the producing repo. Repeating the same declaration is harmless. Changes to a declared surface then reach this repo through notify and its inbox. Use consumers to see who depends on a surface.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
producedRepoIdNoOptional id of the repo that produces the surface, when known.
producedSurfaceYesSurface this repo depends on, for example http:GET /orders/:id.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.1.3
    • addedInput schema / properties / producedRepoId / description
      Added value: +"Optional id of the repo that produces the surface, when known."
    • addedInput schema / properties / producedSurface / description
      Added value: +"Surface this repo depends on, for example http:GET /orders/:id."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose key behaviors: declarations are idempotent ('Repeating the same declaration is harmless') and change delivery happens through notify and the inbox. It omits authorization/error behavior and return semantics, so it is strong but not complete.

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?

The definition is front-loaded and appropriately brief, but it repeats the delivery concept twice ('changes ... are delivered to this repo' and 'Changes ... then reach this repo through notify and its inbox'). That redundancy keeps it from being maximally concise.

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?

For a two-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, idempotency, downstream effect, and the inverse sibling tool. It leaves return/confirmation behavior and permission requirements unstated, but the essential calling context is present.

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 both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description restates the optional nature of producedRepoId and repeats the producedSurface example but adds no syntax or validation details 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 uses a specific verb ('Declare') and resource ('this repo consumes a surface'), gives a concrete example ('http:GET /orders/:id'), and distinguishes the tool from the inverse sibling tool 'consumers'. An agent can identify the operation 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 Guidelines4/5

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

It establishes the context for registering a dependency and points to 'consumers' for the inverse query, but it does not explicitly say when not to use this tool or compare it against notify/inbox alternatives. The guidance is clear but not exhaustive.

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