Skip to main content
Glama
po4erk91

Thread Keeper

by po4erk91
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

note

Record terse thread updates—decisions, failures, insights, or open questions—to preserve cross-session memory; adding one revives an idle or closed thread to active.

Instructions

Add a note to a thread. Write terse, optimized for future-Claude.

kind: 'move' (we tried/decided X), 'failed' (tried X, broke because Y), 'insight' (crystallized observation), 'open_q' (something to come back to).

Reopens the thread: a note on an idle OR closed thread revives it to active. Closed is not terminal — returning to a topic (adding a note) brings it back. This is what makes aggressive auto-close safe: the thread-janitor can close idle threads to harvest skills, and you just note() to pick any of them back up.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindNomove
sourceNo
contentYes
thread_idYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.19.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / source
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "",
+  "title": "Source",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observedv0.13.2

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnly=false, idempotent=false, destructiveHint=false, so the baseline safety profile is already present. The description adds meaningful behavior beyond that: a note on an idle OR closed thread revives it to active, which is a non-obvious state side effect. It does not mention auth/permission needs or error modes, keeping it below 5.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then the kind legend, then the reopening rationale. Every section is informative and the kind list is scannable. The final paragraph is a touch narrative but earns its place by explaining why auto-close is safe.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the description covers the important state-transition behavior and the kind semantics. Complete enough for correct invocation, with the unexplained `source` parameter being the only notable omission.

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 coverage is 0% with no enums and no property descriptions, so the description carries the load. It documents the `kind` values (move/failed/insight/open_q) well and hints at `content` ('terse'), and `thread_id` is inferable. However `source` is left entirely unexplained, a real gap at 0% schema coverage.

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+resource ('Add a note to a thread') that is immediately distinguishable from lifecycle siblings like open_thread, close_thread, and idle_thread. The kind taxonomy further clarifies the intended content. Clear but does not explicitly contrast itself with the closest siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives concrete guidance on how to use it ('write terse, optimized for future-Claude') and what each kind is for, plus the important context that note() is the recovery path after auto-close. It lacks any explicit comparison to alternatives such as review_thread or lesson_append, but the workflow context is strong.

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