Skip to main content
Glama

track_file_evolution

Visualize a file's git commit history to understand changes and development rationale over time.

Instructions

Show how a file evolved through git commits with rationale

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_pathNoPath to manuscript directory (defaults to current directory)
file_pathYesFile to track evolution for
limitNoMaximum commits to return

Implementation Reference

  • MCP tool handler: extracts file_path and limit from args and delegates execution to WritersAid instance.
    private async trackFileEvolution(args: Record<string, unknown>) {
      const filePath = args.file_path as string;
      const limit = (args.limit as number) || 10;
    
      return this.writersAid.trackFileEvolution({ filePath, limit });
    }
  • Tool schema defining input parameters: file_path (required), optional limit and project_path.
    {
      name: "track_file_evolution",
      description: "Show how a file evolved through git commits with rationale",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          project_path: { type: "string", description: "Path to manuscript directory (defaults to current directory)" },
          file_path: { type: "string", description: "File to track evolution for" },
          limit: { type: "number", description: "Maximum commits to return", default: 10 },
        },
        required: ["file_path"],
      },
    },
  • Tool registration in the central handleTool switch statement.
    case "track_file_evolution":
      return this.trackFileEvolution(args);
  • Core helper method in WritersAid that fetches git commit history for the file via GitIntegrator and formats evolution data with commit details.
    async trackFileEvolution(options: { filePath: string; limit?: number }) {
      const evolution = await this.gitIntegrator.getFileEvolution(options.filePath);
      const limited = evolution.slice(0, options.limit || 10);
    
      return {
        filePath: options.filePath,
        revisions: limited.map(({ revision, commit }) => ({
          commitHash: commit.commitHash,
          timestamp: new Date(commit.timestamp * 1000).toISOString(),
          author: commit.author,
          message: commit.message,
          linesAdded: revision.linesAdded,
          linesRemoved: revision.linesRemoved,
          rationale: revision.rationale,
          sessionLinked: !!commit.sessionId,
        })),
        total: evolution.length,
      };
    }
Behavior2/5

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. While it mentions the tool will 'show how a file evolved' and include 'rationale', it doesn't describe what format the output takes, whether it requires git repository access, what happens with large files or repositories, or any performance considerations. The description is too vague about actual behavior.

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 extremely concise at just 8 words, with zero wasted language. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and includes the unique 'rationale' aspect. Every word earns its place in this minimal but complete statement of function.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a tool with 3 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what the output looks like (critical for a 'show' tool), doesn't mention git-specific requirements or behaviors, and provides no context about the 'rationale' aspect. The description leaves too many unanswered questions about how the tool actually works.

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 100% description coverage, so all parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what's already in the schema descriptions. The baseline score of 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting for parameter documentation.

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 with a specific verb ('show') and resource ('file evolution through git commits'), and it adds the unique aspect of 'rationale' which distinguishes it from generic git history tools. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'track_changes' or 'track_concept_evolution', which have similar naming patterns.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when this tool is appropriate, what prerequisites might be needed, or how it differs from sibling tools like 'track_changes' or 'track_concept_evolution' that appear to have related functionality.

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/xiaolai/claude-writers-aid-mcp'

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