Skip to main content
Glama
permanu

SuperSkill

by permanu
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

deprecate

Destructive

Mark a vault item such as an ADR or learning as obsolete and optionally record why, using its relative path and project workspace.

Instructions

Mark a vault item (ADR, learning, etc.) as deprecated with an optional reason.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYesRelative path to the item in the vault
reasonNoWhy this item is being deprecated
workspace_pathNoAbsolute thread workspace directory; must map to this project. Omit only when the server cwd is the thread workspace.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.15.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / workspace_path
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Absolute thread workspace directory; must map to this project. Omit only when the server cwd is the thread workspace.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observedv0.6.1

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The destructiveHint=true annotation already signals a mutation. The description adds useful context by clarifying that the action is marking as deprecated rather than deleting, and that a reason is optional, but it does not cover auth, reversibility, or side effects.

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 front-loaded sentence that names the action, resource, and optional parameter without waste. Every clause earns its place.

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 low-complexity mutation tool with full schema coverage and a destructiveHint annotation, the description is largely complete. It could do more to clarify behavior around sibling tools and workspace_path, but an agent has enough to call it 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 defines path, reason, and workspace_path. The description repeats that reason is optional but adds no syntax, constraints, or meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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?

The description states a clear verb and resource: mark a vault item as deprecated, with examples of item types. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings such as prune or other mutation tools, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

The description gives no explicit context about when to use this tool versus alternatives like prune. It implies usage from the purpose alone, but there is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance.

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