Skip to main content
Glama
markmhendrickson

Neotoma

by markmhendrickson
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

register_schema

Register a new schema or schema version. Supports both global and user-specific schemas.

Instructions

Register a new schema or schema version. Supports both global and user-specific schemas.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
forceNoBypass the entity-type naming guards (forbidden test-artifact patterns and the plural-name guard) for this call only. Required when entity_type is rejected with a message naming "force: true" as the remedy — e.g. a name the plural guard misclassifies (like "hypothesis"). Does not affect any other validation.
user_idNoUser ID for user-specific schema (required if user_specific=true)
activateNo
entity_typeYes
user_specificNo
reducer_configYesPer-field conflict-resolution config. merge_policies maps each field to a strategy: last_write (default — latest observed_at wins), highest_priority (the observation with the largest source_priority wins), most_specific, or merge_array; with an optional tie_breaker (observed_at | source_priority). Set highest_priority to honor source_priority — without it, source_priority is stored but ignored.
schema_versionNo1.0
schema_definitionYesSchema definition with fields object

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.25.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / force
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "Bypass the entity-type naming guards (forbidden test-artifact patterns and the plural-name guard) for this call only. Required when entity_type is rejected with a message naming \"force: true\" as the remedy — e.g. a name the plural guard misclassifies (like \"hypothesis\"). Does not affect any other validation.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.21.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / reducer_config / description
      Previous value: -"Reducer configuration with merge policies"New value: +"Per-field conflict-resolution config. merge_policies maps each field to a strategy: last_write (default — latest observed_at wins), highest_priority (the observation with the largest source_priority wins), most_specific, or merge_array; with an optional tie_breaker (observed_at | source_priority). Set highest_priority to honor source_priority — without it, source_priority is stored but ignored."
  3. Addedv0.15.0
  4. Removedv0.14.0
  5. Addedv0.12.1
  6. Removedv0.11.0
  7. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not say this is a mutating operation, whether re-registering an existing version overwrites or errors, what 'activate' does, or what permissions are required. Beyond labeling the operation as a registration, almost no behavioral context is disclosed.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. Every word carries weight, though the second sentence is thin relative to what an 8-parameter mutation tool needs.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, nested objects, and half the parameters undocumented, the description is far too sparse. It omits activation behavior, idempotency, failure modes, and the meaning of the force flag, all of which the agent needs before calling.

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?

With only 50% schema description coverage across 8 parameters, the description must compensate, and it does not: activate, entity_type, user_specific, and schema_version are undocumented in both places. The phrase 'global and user-specific schemas' gestures at user_specific/user_id but adds no real semantics.

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 ('Register a new schema or schema version') and clarifies the scope dimension (global vs user-specific). It does not differentiate itself from closely related siblings such as update_schema_incremental or register_relationship_type, so an agent must infer the boundary.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The mention of global vs user-specific schemas implies a usage axis, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no statement of when to prefer update_schema_incremental over this, and no prerequisites called out. Usage is inferable but not directed.

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