Skip to main content
Glama

register_project

Register a project to index its markdown files and connect it to the Kontexta knowledge system.

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

TableJSON 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
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses side effects, including writing metadata to disk, recursive scanning, indexing markdown, registering Hands tools, and idempotency. It also states auth/rate limits (none), return format, and error conditions, providing complete transparency beyond what annotations would offer.

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?

The description is lengthy but well-structured with clear sections (SIDE EFFECTS, AUTH/RATE LIMITS, PARAMETERS, RETURNS, ERROR CONDITIONS). Every section adds value, and the use of headers improves scanability. It is slightly verbose but justified by the tool's complexity.

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?

This tool has no output schema and moderate complexity, but the description completely covers return values, error behavior, side effects, and prerequisites. The detailed RETURNS section lists every field, and ERROR CONDITIONS distinguishes fatal vs non-fatal issues. It is comprehensive enough for an agent to use the tool with confidence.

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 baseline is 3, but the description adds critical operational meaning beyond the schema. For the 'path' parameter, it explicitly warns against guessing from the editor workspace and instructs the agent to ask the user for the absolute path if uncertain. This goes beyond the schema's description and improves correct invocation.

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 clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb and resource: 'Register a new project and link it to the Kontexta knowledge system.' It distinguishes this from siblings like list_projects and refresh_index by detailing the registration and indexing side effects, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 description provides clear usage context, such as requiring an absolute path and explicitly instructing to ask the user if only a project name is given. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the tool's uniqueness among siblings makes this less critical. The guidance on when to ask for the path is a strong usage guideline.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/safiyu/kontexta'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server