Skip to main content
Glama

Clipform

by io.github.Clipform

Who Am I

clipform_whoami
Read-onlyIdempotent

Show the current identity: auth mode (api key, oauth, session, or anonymous), active workspace, and plan limits.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contextYesDescribe the user's underlying goal in one sentence - not the tool you're calling.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
planYesPlan limits for the active workspace
linksNoWorkspace-level dashboard links - only present for a non-anonymous caller.
auth_modeYesHow this session is authenticated
workspaceYesActive workspace, or null when anonymous
workspacesNoAll workspaces in the caller's company - only present for session (dashboard) auth
is_authenticatedYesTrue for api_key, oauth, or session auth; false for anonymous

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedOutput schema / properties / auth_mode / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "api_key",
-  "session",
-  "anonymous"
-]New value: +[
+  "api_key",
+  "oauth",
+  "session",
+  "anonymous"
+]
    • changedOutput schema / properties / is_authenticated / description
      Previous value: -"True for api_key or session auth; false for anonymous"New value: +"True for api_key, oauth, or session auth; false for anonymous"
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / context
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Describe the user's underlying goal in one sentence - not the tool you're calling.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / required
      Added value: +[
+  "context"
+]
    • addedOutput schema / properties / links
      Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "description": "Workspace-level dashboard links - only present for a non-anonymous caller.",
+  "properties": {
+    "dashboard": {
+      "description": "Dashboard home for the active workspace.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "forms": {
+      "description": "Forms list for the active workspace.",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "dashboard",
+    "forms"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so no side-effect disclosure is needed. The description adds value beyond those annotations by specifying the exact identity-related data returned: auth modes, workspace, and plan limits. It is consistent with the read-only and idempotent hints.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the action, the resource, and the specific outputs without any filler. Every element earns its place.

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 simple read-only identity-introspection tool with one well-described parameter, an output schema, and strong annotations, the description is complete. It tells the agent what will be returned without needing to explain return structure, since the output schema exists.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the only parameter, 'context', has a clear description in the schema. The tool description does not add anything about the parameter, but the schema already carries the full semantic weight, so the baseline score of 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 begins with a specific verb ('Show') and a clear resource ('current identity'), then enumerates exactly what is included: auth mode, active workspace, and plan limits. This is unambiguous and easily distinguishes the tool from the many form/media/render siblings.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool: whenever the agent needs to know authentication context, the active workspace, or plan limits. It provides clear context, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions.

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

All Clipform 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 clearly distinct purposes: form CRUD, node management, media upload/attach, rendering, search, and guidance retrieval are all separable. The main overlap is among the three render tools (clipform_generate_video, clipform_render_video_template, clipform_render_composition), but their descriptions include explicit disambiguation guidance, so an agent can correctly choose. clipform_get_guide and clipform_get_workflow are also similar but clearly differentiated.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names follow a consistent clipform_<verb>_<noun> pattern throughout, e.g., clipform_create_form, clipform_add_node, clipform_update_node, clipform_delete_node. Minor deviations exist: clipform_whoami is not verb_noun, and get_more_tools lacks the clipform_ prefix, but these are edge cases and the overall convention is highly predictable.

Tool Count3/5

34 tools is on the heavy side for a single MCP server. The server covers a broad domain (form creation, node editing, media management, video rendering, TTS, search, guidance, imports, responses), so the count is defensible, but it is above the typical well-scoped range and may add navigation overhead.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the full lifecycle: create/read/update/delete forms and nodes, media upload/attach/delete, multiple render paths with status checking, TTS generation, music/image/video search, form import, response retrieval, and workflow/guide knowledge. The main gap is lack of a direct branching-logic editor (option-based branching is only in the dashboard), but the API consciously documents that limitation and the rest of the lifecycle is complete.

Resources