Skip to main content
Glama

post_intent

Register your planned work and file paths to prevent other agents from colliding. Get a unique intent ID and collision warnings before starting any non-trivial coding task.

Instructions

Register what you are about to work on so other developers' agents can avoid collisions. Call this before starting any non-trivial coding task (anything touching more than a trivial fix). Infer kind: build for work meant to land, explore/spike for throwaway investigation, decision for a resolved decision worth recording (post it the moment a debate settles: pass the resolution in outcome — what was decided, what was rejected, and why; no touches needed; it is stored complete, never collides, and needs no complete_intent). Infer touches from your plan as repo-relative glob patterns. Returns the intent id — keep it to post the outcome later. Also returns any overlapping in-flight intents — active work (alert warn/nudge/fyi) and recently-completed work that may not have landed in git yet (always fyi): overlaps are the COLLISION signal — if overlap level is warn, tell your user before proceeding; for fyi, check whether that work is already in your tree before redoing it. The response also includes context — recently-completed work relevant to THIS task: read those outcomes before you start, the surprises and dead ends in them are load-bearing (a rejected approach you might retry, a gotcha you will hit).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindNobuild = meant to land; explore/spike = throwaway investigation; decision = a resolved decision recorded for the feed (requires `outcome`).build
repoYesRepository name, e.g. 'raveneye'. Use the basename of the git origin remote (or the repo root directory name if there is no remote) — every agent on the same repo must derive the same string or collision checks silently miss each other.
titleNoShort headline for the work, ≤80 chars, like a commit subject line (e.g. 'FTS5 search + recall mode'). Cheap to write and the feed reads far better with one — provide it.
branchNoGit branch, if known.
outcomeNokind=decision only: the resolution — what was decided, what was rejected, and why. Other kinds write outcomes at completion instead.
summaryYesOne paragraph: what you're doing and why.
touchesYesRepo-relative glob patterns you expect to touch, e.g. ['central/services/scorecard*'].
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It comprehensively explains what the tool returns (intent id, overlapping intents with severity levels warn/nudge/fyi, and context of recent work), how to interpret collision signals, and that decision intents are stored as complete and never collide. It also notes the requirement to keep the intent id for posting outcomes later. No contradictions exist.

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 every sentence adds important context for correct tool usage. It is structured with clear explanations for inferred parameters and return value handling. While it could be slightly more terse, the density of actionable information justifies its length. The guidance is front-loaded with the core purpose and when to call.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description thoroughly explains the return values (id, overlaps with severity, context) and how to act on them. It covers all 7 parameters with extra context, including required fields and special handling for decisions. For a complex tool with 3 required params and behavioral nuance, the description is complete enough for an AI agent to use 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. The description adds significant value beyond the schema by explaining how to infer 'kind' (build/explore/spike/decision with usage rules), how to derive 'repo' consistently, what 'title' should look like (like a commit subject ≤80 chars), and that 'outcome' is only for decisions. It also offers guidance on 'summary' as a one-paragraph explanation. This extra context raises the score above baseline.

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 purpose: 'Register what you are about to work on so other developers' agents can avoid collisions.' This is a specific verb (register) on a specific resource (intent). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_intents, update_intent, complete_intent, and mark_intent_landed by focusing on creation and registration of new work intentions.

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 explicit guidance on when to use the tool: 'Call this before starting any non-trivial coding task (anything touching more than a trivial fix).' It also explains how to infer the 'kind' and 'touches' parameters, and for decisions, it clarifies that no complete_intent is needed. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternative tools for specific scenarios, so it stops 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.

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/sledmonkey/getflightplan'

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