Skip to main content
Glama
naw103

Foremerge

by naw103
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

Record integration commit

record_commit

Record the integration commit where an accepted ChangeSet landed after a merge, marking it COMMITTED. Use after accepting and merging to link the verified work to its final Git history.

Instructions

Record where accepted work finally landed, after it has been merged through ordinary Git or a pull request. Use it last, after accept_changeset and the merge. The commit must contain the accepted commit in its history, otherwise the call fails with TARGET_DIVERGED. On success it stores integration_commit, moves the ChangeSet to COMMITTED, and returns the updated ChangeSet. accepted_commit is kept unchanged, so the record shows both what was verified and where it landed. Foremerge does not merge or push anything itself.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
git_refYesThe landed commit, as a SHA or ref such as main, resolved in the ChangeSet's worktree.
changeset_idYesAn ACCEPTED ChangeSet (chg_...).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.4.3
    • addedInput schema / properties / changeset_id / description
      Added value: +"An ACCEPTED ChangeSet (chg_...)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / git_ref / description
      Added value: +"The landed commit, as a SHA or ref such as main, resolved in the ChangeSet's worktree."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses the failure mode (TARGET_DIVERGED), side effects on success (stores integration_commit, moves ChangeSet to COMMITTED, returns updated ChangeSet), and the non-destructive behavior toward accepted_commit. Since annotations only give false safety hints, this detailed behavioral context is essential and well provided.

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?

Every sentence earns its place: purpose, sequence, failure condition, success effects, preservation of accepted_commit, and a limiter on what the tool does not do. It is compact yet information-dense, with no redundancy.

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?

The description is complete for invoking the tool correctly, covering prerequisites, ordering, error conditions, return value, and side effects. Even without an output schema or meaningful annotations, the agent has enough context to know when and how to call record_commit.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema already describes both parameters with 100% coverage. The description adds important relational context: git_ref must contain the accepted commit in its history or the call fails. This goes beyond the schema's basic definitions and helps the agent understand the meaningful constraint between changeset_id and git_ref.

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 records where accepted work landed after a merge, naming both the action and the resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like accept_changeset by explaining it is used last, after acceptance and merging, and explicitly says it does not merge or push.

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?

Explicit workflow guidance is provided: 'Use it last, after accept_changeset and the merge.' It also states the precondition that the commit must contain the accepted commit in its history, and clarifies that Foremerge does not merge or push anything itself, preventing misuse.

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