Skip to main content
Glama

RevoGrid DataGrid MCP

by io.github.revolist

Find RevoGrid Examples

find_examples
Read-onlyIdempotent

Use when implementation evidence should be a runnable or registered RevoGrid example, optionally filtered by framework and package.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum examples per page.
queryYesCapability or scenario demonstrated by a runnable example.
cursorNoOpaque cursor returned by the previous page.
productNoRevoGrid product demonstrated by the example.
surfaceNoLegacy catalog surface filter.
versionNoIndexed package version.
frameworkNoPreferred example framework.
packageNameNoExact published npm package name.
requiresProNoFilter by descriptive Pro/license requirement.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultsYes
nextCursorNo

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed12 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / cursor
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Opaque cursor returned by the previous page.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / framework / description
      Added value: +"Preferred example framework."
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit / description
      Added value: +"Maximum examples per page."
    • addedInput schema / properties / packageName
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Exact published npm package name.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / product
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "RevoGrid product demonstrated by the example.",
+  "enum": [
+    "core",
+    "pro",
+    "pivot",
+    "gantt",
+    "scheduler",
+    "kanban",
+    "collaboration",
+    "enterprise"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / query / description
      Added value: +"Capability or scenario demonstrated by a runnable example."
    • addedInput schema / properties / requiresPro / description
      Added value: +"Filter by descriptive Pro/license requirement."
    • addedInput schema / properties / surface / description
      Added value: +"Legacy catalog surface filter."
    • addedInput schema / properties / version / description
      Added value: +"Indexed package version."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "nextCursor": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "results": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": false,
+        "properties": {
+          "exampleUrl": {
+            "format": "uri",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "framework": {
+            "enum": [
+              "react",
+              "vue",
+              "angular",
+              "svelte",
+              "vanilla"
+            ],
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "id": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "packages": {
+            "items": {
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            "type": "array"
+          },
+          "requiresPro": {
+            "type": "boolean"
+          },
+          "score": {
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "sourceUrl": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "summary": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "surface": {
+            "enum": [
+              "core",
+              "pro",
+              "pivot",
+              "plugin",
+              "columntype",
+              "migration",
+              "changelog",
+              "internal"
+            ],
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "title": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "version": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "id",
+          "title",
+          "surface",
+          "requiresPro",
+          "summary",
+          "packages",
+          "score"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "results"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / requiresPro
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / surface / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "core",
-  "pro",
-  "pivot",
-  "plugin",
-  "columntype",
-  "migration",
-  "changelog"
-]New value: +[
+  "core",
+  "pro",
+  "pivot",
+  "plugin",
+  "columntype",
+  "migration",
+  "changelog",
+  "internal"
+]
  4. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already establish the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false), so the bar is lower. The description adds modest context by framing output as 'implementation evidence' and restricting the result set to runnable or registered examples, which tells the agent what kind of material it will receive. It does not disclose pagination behavior, what 'registered' means, or how the index is versioned, but those are partially visible in the schema, so a 3 is appropriate.

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?

A single 17-word sentence with zero filler. The usage trigger is front-loaded before the filter qualifier, and every word earns its place. Nothing is redundant with the schema or annotations.

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?

Given a rich schema (100% parameter coverage, 3 enum-constrained params, cursor/limit pagination) plus an output schema and full annotations, the structured data carries most of the burden. The description completes the picture by stating the resource type and the implementation-evidence context. The only omission is explicit sibling differentiation, which is minor because the sibling resource types (docs, API, capabilities, migration notes) are already distinct.

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%, so the baseline is 3 and the schema already documents all nine parameters including the enums and pagination fields. The description adds only a marginal highlight that framework and package are the salient filters, without contributing format, syntax, or interaction details beyond the schema. This matches the baseline exactly.

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 identifies the resource clearly (runnable or registered RevoGrid examples) and scopes it with framework/package filtering, which differentiates it from siblings like search_revogrid_docs, inspect_revogrid_api, and list_revogrid_capabilities by resource type. However, the verb is only implied through the 'Use when...' construction rather than stated directly as 'Finds/Retrieves...', so it stops short of the full 5.

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 opens with an explicit 'Use when...' trigger — when implementation evidence should be a runnable or registered RevoGrid example — which gives strong positive context for tool selection. It does not name sibling alternatives or state exclusions (e.g., when to prefer search_revogrid_docs over this), so it misses the explicit when-not/alternatives requirement for a 5.

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

All RevoGrid DataGrid MCP 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

A4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Each tool targets a distinct stage in the RevoGrid workflow: capability discovery, exact API inspection, broad documentation search, feature-matrix lookup, examples, migration notes, planning, and validation. The discovery-oriented tools overlap somewhat in surface area, but their descriptions clearly separate broad search, exact symbol resolution, and feature-existence checks.

Naming Consistency5/5

All eight tool names follow a consistent lowercase snake_case verb_noun pattern, such as find_examples, list_revogrid_capabilities, and validate_revogrid_usage. While some names omit the 'revogrid' prefix, the imperative verb + object structure is predictable and uniform.

Tool Count5/5

Eight tools is a well-scoped size for a RevoGrid implementation assistant. Each tool maps to a distinct need from discovery through planning and validation, with no redundant or filler tools.

Completeness5/5

The server covers the full advisory lifecycle: discover capabilities, search documentation, resolve feature existence, inspect exact APIs, find examples, plan implementations, validate usage, and check migration notes. There are no obvious gaps or dead ends for the stated RevoGrid-focused purpose.

Resources