ADHD Progress Hub

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

register_workspace

Register a local folder as a project to persist workspace mapping and create an open thread for tracking unfinished work.

Instructions

    Side effect: this persists the workspace/project mapping and, when
    create_open_thread=true, also creates a default open thread. Use
    resolve_project when you only need to resolve an already-known workspace
    or want optional lookup-with-create behavior.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`title`	No
`summary`	No
`source_tool`	No	mcp
`workspace_path`	Yes
`create_open_thread`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.12.0Sep 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden. It explicitly discloses the side effect of persisting the mapping and the conditional thread creation tied to create_open_thread. It could add specifics about idempotency or error cases, but the main behavioral implications are disclosed.

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?

Three sentences, each with a clear role: purpose, side effect, and alternative. No filler.

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 registration tool with an output schema, it covers the core action, side effects, and key alternative, and it mentions the one behavior-affecting parameter. It could be more complete by noting whether registration overwrites existing mappings or requires path validation, but these are not critical gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it only explains create_open_thread's conditional behavior. workspace_path, title, summary, and source_tool receive no semantic explanation.

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 ('local folder as a Hub project') and clarifies that this is a single combined operation. It distinguishes itself from resolve_project by emphasizing registration and persistence.

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 to use resolve_project when only resolution or lookup-with-create is needed, making the boundary between the two tools clear. It also implies this tool is for cases where the workspace/project mapping must be persisted.

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