Projectmem

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

add_decision

Permanently record architectural or product decisions for future contributors. Append-only log updates summary.md; use supersedes to revise an outdated decision without rewriting history.

Instructions

Record an architectural or product decision permanently.

Call when you make a choice that future sessions or contributors
should know about. Decisions show up in `summary.md` and in
`pjm wrap` context blocks.

Side effects: appends a `decision` event and updates summary.md.
Decisions are append-only — to revise, pass `supersedes` with the old
decision's event id instead of editing history.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`project`	No	Which project this call is about — a registered id, alias, or absolute path (e.g. 'ossdrop'). Omit it when the server was started for a single repo, or when an active project is set with `pjm project use`. Call list_projects to see the registered names.
`summary`	Yes	One-line description of the architectural or product decision (e.g., 'use bcrypt rounds=12 for password hashing'). Becomes part of the project's permanent record — write it for a future contributor.
`location`	No	Optional file path or scope where the decision applies (e.g., 'src/auth/' for a module-level choice). Helps precheck_file cite the decision when the file is later touched.
`supersedes`	No	Optional event id (evt_...) of a prior decision this one retires. The old event stays in the log tagged (superseded); only the new decision appears in summary.md. Use when precheck_file flags a decision as possibly stale and you are revising it.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.3.2Sep 8, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / project

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Which project this call is about — a registered id, alias, or absolute path (e.g. 'ossdrop'). Omit it when the server was started for a single repo, or when an active project is set with `pjm project use`. Call list_projects to see the registered names.",
+  "title": "Project"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.4Jun 19, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / supersedes

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Optional event id (evt_...) of a prior decision this one retires. The old event stays in the log tagged (superseded); only the new decision appears in summary.md. Use when precheck_file flags a decision as possibly stale and you are revising it.",
+  "title": "Supersedes"
+}

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.1.3May 20, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / location / description

Added value: +"Optional file path or scope where the decision applies (e.g., 'src/auth/' for a module-level choice). Helps precheck_file cite the decision when the file is later touched."

addedInput schema / properties / summary / description

Added value: +"One-line description of the architectural or product decision (e.g., 'use bcrypt rounds=12 for password hashing'). Becomes part of the project's permanent record — write it for a future contributor."

First observedv0.1.1May 19, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the disclosure burden. It clearly states the side effects: appends a decision event and updates summary.md, and it explicitly calls out append-only semantics with supersedes as the revision mechanism. It does not discuss permissions or failure modes, but the core mutating behavior is transparent.

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 compact and each sentence earns its place: what the tool does, when to call it, where the output surfaces, and side effects/revision behavior. No filler or repetition.

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?

Given the complete input schema, the presence of an output schema, and a description that covers selection trigger, side effects, and revision, nothing essential is missing. An agent can confidently decide when to invoke this tool and what behavior to expect.

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%, and the schema itself provides rich meaning with examples, project disambiguation, and supersedes behavior. The prose description does not need to add parameter detail; it only reinforces the supersedes context. 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-object pair ('Record ... decision permanently') and immediately establishes the resource and its durable nature. It also gives the trigger condition, which separates this from generic note/attempt tools by the permanent, summary-visible artifact.

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?

The 'Call when you make a choice...' sentence is an explicit trigger condition, and the supersedes guidance tells the agent how to handle revisions. It does not name sibling alternatives or provide explicit when-not-to-use guidance, so it falls short of a 5.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server