A2UI Atomic Catalog

build_multi_page_surface

Read-onlyIdempotent

Build a multi-section A2UI app from raw title+content sections — you never estimate size or decide how to split; each section becomes its own independently-encoded page (no shared hub, so per-page size never grows with page count — genuinely unlimited sections). Returns the first page's url plus a pages array ([{heading, url}]) for every section — present that list to the user yourself (e.g. numbered links); pages do not cross-link to each other. Prefer this over make_surface_url for multi-section content.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "title": "<title>",
      "sections": "<sections>"
    },
    "name": "build_multi_page_surface"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`title`	Yes	Hub page title
`sections`	Yes	Array of {heading, content} sections
`renderer_url`	No	Your deployed renderer /exec URL (optional; defaults to BYO)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`url`	Yes	URL of the first page.
`note`	No	How the pages relate.
`size`	No	Present when the URL is large: url_length, warning and recommendation.
`pages`	Yes	One entry per page, each with a url.
`clipboard`	No	Optional ready-made copy commands for the URL (linux, macos, windows) plus a note.
`page_count`	Yes	Number of pages.
`required_catalogs`	Yes	Catalog URIs the payload needs (base catalog first).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotent/non-destructive, yet the description still adds real behavioral context: no shared hub, per-page size never grows with page count, pages do not cross-link, and the caller must present the page list to the user itself. The one gap is that it doesn't mention auth or renderer requirements beyond the optional renderer_url parameter.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with purpose and the sibling preference comes last, which is the right order. It is dense with em-dashes and parentheticals in a single long sentence, so a little readability is lost, but every clause carries information an agent needs.

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?

Even though an output schema exists, the description usefully states the return shape ({url, pages: [{heading, url}]}) and, more importantly, tells the agent it must surface that list to the user — a behavioral obligation no schema can convey. Nothing needed to call this correctly is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds genuine meaning: sections are raw text that get auto-split one-per-page (so the caller should never pre-split), and title is the hub page title. Minor tension: the schema calls title a 'Hub page title' while the description says there is 'no shared hub'.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('Build a multi-section A2UI app from raw title+content sections') and immediately explains the key mechanic: each section becomes its own independently-encoded page. That distinguishes it from a generic single-page URL builder without requiring the agent to open a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It names the alternative explicitly — 'Prefer this over make_surface_url for multi-section content' — giving both the condition (multi-section content) and the competing tool. The agent has enough to route correctly between the two without inference.

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

All A2UI Atomic Catalog tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.