Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
safiyu

kontexta

by safiyu
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

projects_register

Register a project and link it to the Kontexta knowledge system by indexing its Markdown files and enabling declared Hands tools.

Instructions

Register a new project and link it to the Kontexta knowledge system.

SIDE EFFECTS: Writes project metadata to disk (persisted in the Kontexta data directory). Scans the project root recursively to discover and index all markdown files into the local database. Registers any kontexta.json-declared Hands tools found in the project root. This operation is idempotent, re-registering an existing project updates its metadata without data loss.

AUTH / RATE LIMITS: None. Operates entirely on the local file system.

PARAMETERS:

  • name: Human-readable project name.

  • path: Absolute path to the project root. Required. DO NOT guess or assume the path based on the active editor workspace unless the user explicitly asks to register the "current" or "open" project. If the user provides a project name but no path, ask them for the absolute path before calling this tool. Fails with a descriptive error if the path does not exist or is inaccessible.

  • description: Optional free-text description stored with the project metadata.

RETURNS: A JSON object containing:

  • project: { id, name, path, description, created_at }

  • discovered_files_count: number of markdown files indexed

  • discovered_files: array of { path, est_tokens, size_bytes } for each file

  • total_est_tokens: estimated total token cost of all discovered files

  • hands: { found, tools_registered, tools_disabled, warnings }

  • warnings: array of non-fatal issues (e.g. scan failures, token budget exceeded)

ERROR CONDITIONS: Returns isError=true if path is missing or unresolvable. Scan failures are non-fatal and reported in warnings rather than as errors.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesProject name
pathYesAbsolute path to the project root. Required. DO NOT guess from the active workspace unless asked. Ask the user if unsure.
descriptionNoOptional project description

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv6.1.2

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so thoroughly: it discloses disk writes, recursive scanning/indexing, Hands tool registration, idempotency ('updates its metadata without data loss'), and the absence of auth/rate limits. It also distinguishes fatal errors (missing path) from non-fatal scan warnings, which is exactly the behavioral detail an agent needs.

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?

Labeled sections (SIDE EFFECTS, AUTH/RATE LIMITS, PARAMETERS, RETURNS, ERROR CONDITIONS) front-load the core action and make the long content scannable. Every section conveys distinct information with no filler.

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?

No annotations and no output schema exist, so the description must cover both behavior and returns — and it does, enumerating the return object fields and the error/warning split. For a 3-param mutation tool, nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 meaningfully enriches the parameters: it specifies that path must be absolute, forbids guessing from the workspace, instructs the agent to prompt the user, and describes the failure mode. It adds real semantic value beyond the schema strings.

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 and resource ('Register a new project and link it to the Kontexta knowledge system') and the side-effects section clarifies the scope (indexing markdown, registering Hands tools), which implicitly separates it from read-only siblings like projects_list. It never explicitly names a sibling (e.g. projects_refresh_index or projects_map), so it stops short of full differentiation.

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 clear operational context: it tells the agent not to guess the path from the active workspace and to ask the user when only a name is given, and notes it fails on a nonexistent path. There is no explicit when-to-use-vs-alternatives routing against projects_refresh_index or projects_map, but the guidance it does provide is actionable.

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