Skip to main content
Glama

post_intent

Register upcoming coding work before you start so other agents detect overlaps and avoid collisions. Returns in-flight and recently completed intents plus relevant context.

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). Overlap entries carry summary_excerpt; context entries carry summary_excerpt and outcome_excerpt. overlaps_omitted counts what the server cut per alert level — a non-zero warn there means more warnings exist than are shown. Call get_intent(id) for any full record.

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*'].

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden and largely delivers: it explains that decision-type intents are stored complete, never collide, and need no complete_intent; that it returns the intent id to keep for the later outcome post; and describes the overlap alert levels warn/nudge/fyi and what each obliges the agent to do. This is exactly the behavioral context annotations would otherwise supply.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The core guidance is front-loaded well, but the second half becomes a dense run-on packed with field names and conditional alert logic. It is information-rich but strains readability; a few of the parentheticals could be trimmed without loss.

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?

For a 7-parameter mutation tool with a rich implied return shape and no output schema, this covers the important ground: kind inference, touch inference, the intent id, overlap warnings, context of prior outcomes, and the overlaps_omitted count. It stops short of describing the full response envelope or pagination/limits, but it is close to complete for correct invocation.

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 goes beyond by giving decision-specific semantics (outcome contents, no touches needed) and explains how touches should be inferred (repo-relative globs from the plan), adding operational meaning to the parameters rather than restating them.

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?

States a specific verb ('Register') and resource ('what you are about to work on') with a concrete goal ('so other developers' agents can avoid collisions'). Clearly distinguishes this write/registration tool from the read-oriented siblings list_intents and get_intent.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly says when to call it ('before starting any non-trivial coding task (anything touching more than a trivial fix)') and gives kind-specific guidance, including that decision should be posted 'the moment a debate settles' with no touches needed. Routes the agent to get_intent for full records, effectively naming the alternative for consuming results.

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