Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
undo

undo

by tathagat22
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

Create a checkpoint

walkback_checkpoint

Create a recoverable checkpoint in your project before making changes, enabling you to rewind to this exact state if needed.

Instructions

Mark a point in time you can rewind to. Call this BEFORE you start making changes.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "label": "<label>"
    },
    "name": "walkback_checkpoint"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cwdNoProject directory. Defaults to the server's working directory.
labelYesA short description, e.g. 'before refactor'.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.2

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses the tool saves a state for rewinding and implies safe invocation before changes. No contradictions found.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no waste. Every word adds value.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 params, no output schema), the description is sufficient. Could mention revert behavior but implied by sibling tool names.

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 coverage is 100%, so description need not add param info. However, the description does not enhance the meaning of 'label' or 'cwd' beyond schema definitions.

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 marks a point in time for rewinding and distinguishes it from siblings like walkback_revert. The verb 'mark' and resource 'checkpoint' are specific.

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?

Explicitly instructs to call 'BEFORE you start making changes,' which provides clear when-to-use context. Does not list alternatives but the timing guidance is strong.

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