Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Aletheia

Aletheia

by mohamed-ashraf-elsaed
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

Write a work-state list

work_state_write
DestructiveIdempotent

Save and replace a named project to-do or scratch list; send the complete list each time to keep task state current.

Instructions

Save a named to-do or scratch list for a project. Writing an existing name replaces all its items, so send the full list each time; read it back with work_state_read. Use this for running task state, and save_memory for durable facts. Returns "Saved list ..." for a new list or "Updated list ..." for a replaced one; a blank name or non-array items is an error.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
listYesList name, such as "todo". Names are matched exactly after trimming. Required.
itemsYesThe complete new list: strings, numbers, booleans or plain objects, for example ["ship", {"task": "test", "done": false}]. Replaces any earlier items. Required.
projectNoProject key the list belongs to. Default: the project of the server's working directory, else "default". Lists are separate per project.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.1.3
    • addedInput schema / properties / items / description
      Added value: +"The complete new list: strings, numbers, booleans or plain objects, for example [\"ship\", {\"task\": \"test\", \"done\": false}]. Replaces any earlier items. Required."
    • addedInput schema / properties / items / items
      Added value: +{}
    • addedInput schema / properties / list / description
      Added value: +"List name, such as \"todo\". Names are matched exactly after trimming. Required."
    • addedInput schema / properties / project / description
      Added value: +"Project key the list belongs to. Default: the project of the server's working directory, else \"default\". Lists are separate per project."
  2. First observedv0.1.2

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, and the description adds concrete behavioral detail beyond them: writing an existing name replaces all its items, the full list must be sent each time, return strings distinguish new vs. updated lists, and blank names or non-array items are errors. That is exactly the context an agent needs for a destructive write tool.

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 front-loaded with purpose and immediately follows with replacement semantics, alternatives, and return/error behavior. Every sentence carries useful selection or invocation guidance, with no filler.

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?

Although there is no output schema, the description explains the return strings and error conditions. Combined with the annotations covering destructive and idempotent behavior, it gives an agent everything needed to call this mutation tool safely and 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents list names, item types, replacement behavior, and the project default. The description reinforces full-list semantics and blank-name errors but adds little parameter meaning beyond what is already structured, so the 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Save a named to-do or scratch list for a project.' It explicitly distinguishes the tool from work_state_read for reading and save_memory for durable facts, so an agent can route correctly without opening any 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 names the alternative tools and the conditions that select them: use this for running task state, use save_memory for durable facts, and read back with work_state_read. It also warns that an existing name replaces all items, which is the key operational condition for calling this tool correctly.

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