Skip to main content
Glama

Minds: Synthetic Market Research Panels

by ai.getminds

Export Website Heatmap

export_heatmap
Idempotent

Exports a completed website heatmap from a Study result, identified by the message ID reported with the completed result. Returns the same ZIP archive as the web app, including its unified-renderer PDF report, Markdown, images, and metadata.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
forceNoRegenerate the ZIP archive instead of returning the cached artifact.
panelIdNoStudy ID (UUID; legacy wire field name: panelId)
studyIdNoStudy ID (UUID).
messageIdYesID of the completed Study result containing the website heatmap. Completed Study results report this identifier when the answer carries a heatmap.
panelNameNoStudy name (fuzzy matched; legacy wire field name: panelName)
studyNameNoStudy name (fuzzy matched).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / messageId / description
      Previous value: -"ID of the completed panel message containing the website heatmap. Completed panel results report this identifier when the answer carries a heatmap."New value: +"ID of the completed Study result containing the website heatmap. Completed Study results report this identifier when the answer carries a heatmap."
    • changedInput schema / properties / panelId / description
      Previous value: -"Panel ID (UUID)"New value: +"Study ID (UUID; legacy wire field name: panelId)"
    • changedInput schema / properties / panelName / description
      Previous value: -"Panel name (fuzzy matched)"New value: +"Study name (fuzzy matched; legacy wire field name: panelName)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / studyId
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Study ID (UUID).",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / studyName
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Study name (fuzzy matched).",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / messageId / description
      Previous value: -"ID of the completed panel message containing the website heatmap"New value: +"ID of the completed panel message containing the website heatmap. Completed panel results report this identifier when the answer carries a heatmap."
  4. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish idempotency and non-destructiveness. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying the exact return artifact: the same ZIP archive as the web app, containing a PDF report, Markdown, images, and metadata. This goes beyond the structured annotations and does not contradict them.

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 tightly written sentences with no filler. The first sentence front-loads the action and key identifier; the second specifies the output contents. Every clause contributes meaningful information.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a tool with a single required parameter and full schema coverage for optional parameters, the description provides everything needed to call it correctly: what is exported, where the identifier comes from, and what the returned artifact contains. The absence of an output schema is mitigated by the explicit description of the ZIP contents.

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 for all six parameters, so the description is not required to explain parameter semantics. The description only reinforces messageId's role as the completed-result identifier, adding no information beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Exports') and clearly identifies the resource ('website heatmap') and source ('from a Study result' with 'message ID'). This differentiates it from sibling export tools like export_audience, export_mind, and export_study by resource type.

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?

The description gives a clear usage condition: export only a completed website heatmap identified by the message ID reported with the completed result. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the resource-specific wording makes the intended context unambiguous.

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

All Minds: Synthetic Market Research Panels toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have a clearly distinct purpose, but ask_audience and ask_study both handle single-question asking and could be confused without careful reading. The get_study_run/status/summary trio also overlaps somewhat, though the descriptions draw useful boundaries.

Naming Consistency5/5

Tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: ask_, create_, export_, get_, list_, plan_, run_, save_. Lists use plural nouns while actions use singular targets, and the naming makes the resource and action predictable.

Tool Count4/5

19 tools is on the heavier side, but the count is justified by the audience/study/draft/export/limits lifecycle. A few tools could arguably be consolidated, but none feel like pure bloat or redundancy.

Completeness4/5

The suite covers the core research workflow well: create audiences, plan and run studies, ask single questions, retrieve results, and export outputs. Missing update/delete operations for audiences and studies are the main gaps, but agents can work around them for typical research tasks.

Resources