Skip to main content
Glama
phasespace-labs

palinode

by phasespace-labs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

palinode_rollback

Destructive

Revert a memory file to a previous version safely, preserving history with a new commit. Defaults to dry run; refuses to undo retirements unless acknowledged.

Instructions

Revert a memory file to a previous version. Safe: creates a new commit preserving the old version in history. Defaults to dry run. A rollback that would undo a retirement (archive/supersede/retraction) is named in the preview and refused unless undo_retirements=true; prefer palinode_restore to bring a retired memory back.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
commitNoTarget commit hash (from palinode_history). Default: previous version.
dry_runNoIf true (default), show what would change without applying.
file_pathYesMemory file path to rollback
undo_retirementsNoAcknowledge that applying undoes a retirement and brings the record back as current. Without it such a rollback is refused.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.22.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / undo_retirements
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "Acknowledge that applying undoes a retirement and brings the record back as current. Without it such a rollback is refused.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.14.0
    • removedInput schema / properties / file
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Deprecated alias for `file_path`; use `file_path` instead.",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • addedInput schema / required
      Added value: +[
+  "file_path"
+]
  3. First observedv0.9.5

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description adds genuinely new behavioral context: the change is committed so the old version survives in history, dry run is the default, and retirement-undone rollbacks are refused. The word 'Safe' sits in mild tension with destructiveHint=true (the current file state does change), but the description clarifies reversibility rather than contradicting the annotation, so it is not a contradiction.

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?

Four compact sentences, front-loaded with the core action and the safety model before the retirement caveat. Every sentence carries load; only the safety/refusal material borders on dense.

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?

For a mutation tool with no output schema and only 4 parameters, the description covers the action, reversibility model, dry-run default, refusal behavior, and the correct alternative sibling. Combined with annotations that already carry the safety profile, an agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema by sourcing the commit parameter from palinode_history and framing undo_retirements as an explicit acknowledgement gate rather than a plain flag. This cross-tool reference is real added value over the field-level descriptions.

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?

States a specific verb (revert) and resource (a memory file to a previous version) precisely, and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling palinode_restore, which it tells the agent to prefer for reviving retired memories. 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?

Gives the when (revert to a previous version), the when-not (a rollback that would undo a retirement is refused unless undo_retirements=true), and names the alternative tool (palinode_restore) with the condition that selects it. Nothing is left to inference.

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