Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

OrgGen AI

by ai.orggen
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

add_data_source

Creates a data-source block (kind='data-source') with its metadata (sourceType, refreshCadence, descriptive connectionInfo, no credentials). If connectionInfo contains a key that looks like a credential (password/token/secret/api_key/…), even nested at any depth, the WHOLE call is refused with an explicit error naming the offending key — nothing is written. Fits when the user mentions an external source (Salesforce, internal database, file, event stream…).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
xNoX position in pixels. x/y omitted (recommended): automatic placement (column dedicated to sources, same slot as `auto_layout_mcd`), then `auto_layout_mcd` for the final tidy-up.
yNoY position in pixels. See x — absent = automatic placement.
idYesUnique kebab-case ID (e.g. 'salesforce-prod')
descNo
nameYesDisplay name
widthNo
heightNo
colorKeyNo
sourceTypeNo
connectionInfoNo
refreshCadenceNo
extractionLogicNo
expectedProjectIdNoUUID of the project targeted by THIS call. ACTUALLY targets this project instead of the session project. Refused without changing anything if access is not granted.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / expectedProjectId / description
      Previous value: -"UUID du projet visé par CET appel. Cible RÉELLEMENT ce projet au lieu du projet de session. Refusé sans rien modifier si l'accès n'est pas accordé."New value: +"UUID of the project targeted by THIS call. ACTUALLY targets this project instead of the session project. Refused without changing anything if access is not granted."
    • changedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Previous value: -"ID unique kebab-case (ex: 'salesforce-prod')"New value: +"Unique kebab-case ID (e.g. 'salesforce-prod')"
    • changedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Previous value: -"Nom affiché"New value: +"Display name"
    • changedInput schema / properties / x / description
      Previous value: -"Position X en pixels. x/y omis (recommandé) : placement automatique (colonne dédiée aux sources, même logement que `auto_layout_mcd`), puis `auto_layout_mcd` pour la mise au propre finale."New value: +"X position in pixels. x/y omitted (recommended): automatic placement (column dedicated to sources, same slot as `auto_layout_mcd`), then `auto_layout_mcd` for the final tidy-up."
    • changedInput schema / properties / y / description
      Previous value: -"Position Y en pixels. Voir x — absent = placement auto."New value: +"Y position in pixels. See x — absent = automatic placement."
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / x / description
      Previous value: -"Position X en pixels. OMETS x/y (recommandé) : placement automatique (colonne dédiée aux sources, même logement que `auto_layout_mcd`), puis `auto_layout_mcd` pour la mise au propre finale."New value: +"Position X en pixels. x/y omis (recommandé) : placement automatique (colonne dédiée aux sources, même logement que `auto_layout_mcd`), puis `auto_layout_mcd` pour la mise au propre finale."
    • changedInput schema / properties / y / description
      Previous value: -"Position Y en pixels. Voir x — laisser absent = placement auto."New value: +"Position Y en pixels. Voir x — absent = placement auto."
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only cover the safety profile (not read-only, not destructive, closed-world). The description goes well beyond them by disclosing a hard validation policy: any credential-like key at any nesting depth causes the entire call to be refused, nothing is written, and the error names the offending key. That is exactly the kind of behavioral contract annotations cannot express.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the creation contract, followed by the guardrail and the usage cue. The credential sentence is long but earns its place; nothing is padding.

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?

For a 13-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and thin schema descriptions, the description covers the two things an agent most needs: what gets written and the credential refusal that can void the call. It is silent on the returned identifier and on how a new source should be positioned relative to auto_layout_mcd, which are minor gaps.

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 coverage is low (38%) across 13 parameters, so the description must compensate; it partially does by naming sourceType, refreshCadence and the credential-free constraint on connectionInfo. However, position/size/colorKey/extractionLogic and the placement interaction with auto_layout_mcd get no description-level treatment.

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 (creates) and resource (a data-source block with kind='data-source'), and enumerates the metadata it writes. This cleanly separates it from update_data_source and delete_data_source in the sibling list.

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?

Gives an explicit selection cue: 'Fits when the user mentions an external source (Salesforce, internal database, file, event stream…)'. It never names a competing sibling (e.g. update_data_source) as the alternative, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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

All OrgGen AI toolsInspect
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.

Resources