List visual presets
list_visual_presetsRead-only
Complete looks (treatment, typography, colors, motion) that can style a draft.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Motion Text
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
C2.3/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, but description adds no behavioral context beyond that (e.g., no mention of authentication, rate limits, or idempotency).
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness2/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single sentence that is concise but grammatically incomplete as a description. It reads as a definition, not an action-oriented command, undermining structure.
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?
Missing return format details. For a list tool, the description should indicate what is returned (e.g., array of preset objects). No output schema exists to compensate.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters4/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
No parameters exist, so schema coverage is 100%. Description adds no parameter info, which is acceptable given zero parameters.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose2/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description is a noun phrase defining presets rather than stating the action of listing them. It lacks a verb like 'Lists' or 'Retrieves', making the purpose vague.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like create_story_draft or get_spec. Context about styling drafts is implied but not explicit about selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: creating drafts, retrieving specifications, and listing visual presets. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using snake_case (create_story_draft, get_spec, list_visual_presets), making them predictable and easy to understand.
Tool Count4/5
Three tools is slightly below average but well-scoped for a focused server dedicated to story draft creation. Each tool serves a necessary function without unnecessary expansion.
Completeness3/5
The tool set covers core creation and configuration capabilities but lacks lifecycle management tools (e.g., updating or deleting drafts). Users cannot retrieve existing drafts or manage them beyond creation, which may lead to dead ends.