Skip to main content
Glama

check_stale_adrs

Identify Accepted ADRs that have not been reviewed recently and may require updates, using a configurable age threshold.

Instructions

Find Accepted ADRs that have not been reviewed in a while and may need revisiting

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
monthsNoAge threshold in months (default: 6)

Implementation Reference

  • db.js:124-132 (handler)
    The logic to query stale ADRs from the database.
    export function getStaleADRs(months = 6) {
      return db.prepare(`
        SELECT a.id, a.title, a.status, a.created_at, s.project
        FROM adrs a JOIN sessions s ON s.id = a.session_id
        WHERE a.status = 'Accepted'
          AND a.created_at <= datetime('now', '-' || ? || ' months')
        ORDER BY a.created_at ASC
      `).all(months);
    }
  • index.js:240-250 (registration)
    Registration of the check_stale_adrs tool and its handler implementation.
    server.registerTool('check_stale_adrs', {
      description: 'Find Accepted ADRs that have not been reviewed in a while and may need revisiting',
      inputSchema: {
        months: z.number().optional().describe('Age threshold in months (default: 6)'),
      },
    }, async ({ months = 6 }) => {
      const stale = getStaleADRs(months);
    
      if (!stale.length) {
        return { content: [{ type: 'text', text: `No ADRs older than ${months} months. Everything looks fresh.` }] };
      }
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the tool 'finds' ADRs, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't specify whether it returns a list, count, or details, or if it has side effects like logging. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior and output.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the core action ('Find Accepted ADRs') and adds only essential context ('that have not been reviewed in a while and may need revisiting'), making it easy to parse and understand quickly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (1 parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. It covers the purpose but lacks details on behavior, output format, or error handling. Without annotations or an output schema, the description should do more to explain what the tool returns and how it operates, but it meets a basic threshold for clarity.

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?

The input schema has 1 parameter with 100% description coverage, providing a clear default and type. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific details beyond what the schema already states (e.g., it doesn't explain what 'months' means in context or how the threshold is applied). With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the description doesn't compensate but also doesn't detract.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Find Accepted ADRs that have not been reviewed in a while and may need revisiting.' It specifies the verb 'find' and the resource 'Accepted ADRs' with a specific condition (not reviewed in a while). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'review_adr' or 'update_adr_status' that might also handle ADR review processes.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage context ('may need revisiting'), suggesting this tool is for identifying stale ADRs rather than performing reviews or updates. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like 'review_adr' (for actual review) or 'search_decisions' (for broader searches), and doesn't mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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/wooxogh/adr-mcp-setup'

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