A2UI Atomic Catalog

emit_training_runbook

Read-onlyIdempotent

Build a multi-lesson training/course surface as ONE properly-linked page with real in-app tab navigation between lessons — prefer this over build_multi_page_surface for training/course content specifically: that tool produces N independent pages with NO links between them (you must present the list yourself); this tool produces one page where lessons are real, clickable tabs. Zero sizing/estimation judgment required — give it your lessons, it handles composition and navigation.

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>",
      "lessons": "<lessons>"
    },
    "name": "emit_training_runbook"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`title`	Yes	Course title
`lessons`	Yes	Array of {heading, content} lessons — each becomes its own tab
`renderer_url`	No	Your deployed renderer /exec URL (optional; defaults to BYO)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`url`	Yes	Renderer URL carrying the payload.
`note`	No	How the tabs work.
`size`	No	Present when the URL is large: url_length, warning and recommendation.
`payload`	Yes	The compiled A2UI v1.0 createSurface payload.
`clipboard`	No	Optional ready-made copy commands for the URL (linux, macos, windows) plus a note.
`required_catalogs`	Yes	Catalog URIs the payload needs (base catalog first).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: composition and tab navigation are handled internally, so no sizing or estimation judgment is needed from the caller. It stops short of describing return values or rendering/publishing behavior, which is acceptable given an output schema exists.

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?

The core capability is front-loaded in the first clause, and the contrast with the sibling follows. It is somewhat dense and repeats the page-count distinction twice (N independent pages vs one tabbed page), but every sentence carries selection-relevant information.

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?

With only three parameters, full schema coverage, an output schema, and rich annotations, the description covers what an agent needs to choose and call the tool. The only gap is how the resulting surface is surfaced to the user, which the output schema presumably resolves.

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 schema already documents title, lessons, and renderer_url including the BYO default. The description adds only the framing that lessons become tabs and that the tool handles composition — helpful but marginal over the structured fields.

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?

States a specific verb and resource — building a multi-lesson training/course surface as one page with real tab navigation between lessons — and immediately contrasts it with build_multi_page_surface, so the agent can distinguish the two without opening either 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?

Explicitly says to prefer this tool over build_multi_page_surface for training/course content specifically, and explains why: the sibling produces N independent unlinked pages while this produces one page with clickable tabs. The selection condition is stated outright.

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.