Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

OrgGen AI

by ai.orggen
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

analyze_canvas

Read-only

Analyzes the state of the canvas and automatically detects problems: missing positions, overlaps, invalid references, orphan blocks, broken dependencies. Serves when the user reports a visual problem or asks for a diagnostic. Returns a structured report with the problems detected and fix recommendations. Also returns cardsOverBudget: the PERMANENT list of the cards {cellId, cellName, used, budget} whose cumulated content, all content blocks combined, exceeds the cap of 12 entries per card — including an old overflow, not touched by the current turn (unlike the 'content.card-truncated' finding, which only flags what a turn has just introduced). Also returns duplicatedActionsEntries: the native tasks (create_tasks) of the WHOLE project whose normalized title matches an entry of an 'actions' content block of THE SAME block — a possible duplicate between the trackable register (task) and the documentary register (content block), which no creation finding can see if it was born before this turn (migration, another session, import). A FINDING, not a refusal: nothing is touched in the 'actions' content block. Also returns sharesOnNoCapitalNature: the assignments {cellId, cellName, personId, shares, cellType} that declare a numeric capital share on a block nature that has none (division, externe, infrastructure) — PERMANENT state, a legacy the tool never deletes. Fields absent = nothing to report, which does not mean "I did not look".

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
includeAllDepsNoInclude the full list of all the dependencies in the JSON (`allDependencies`, default: true). No effect on `formattedReport`: that text report has never listed all the dependencies — only those with problems appear in it
includeAllCellsNoInclude the full list of all the blocks — in the JSON (`allCells`) AND in `formattedReport` (section "ALL BLOCKS"). false: both are limited to the blocks with problems, with a note saying how many were omitted (default: true)
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. Changed3 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 / includeAllCells / description
      Previous value: -"Inclure la liste complète de toutes les cells — dans le JSON (`allCells`) ET dans `formattedReport` (section « TOUTES LES CELLS »). false : les deux se limitent aux cells en problème, avec une note qui dit combien ont été omises (défaut: true)"New value: +"Include the full list of all the blocks — in the JSON (`allCells`) AND in `formattedReport` (section \"ALL BLOCKS\"). false: both are limited to the blocks with problems, with a note saying how many were omitted (default: true)"
    • changedInput schema / properties / includeAllDeps / description
      Previous value: -"Inclure la liste complète de toutes les dépendances dans le JSON (`allDependencies`, défaut: true). Sans effet sur `formattedReport` : ce rapport texte n'a jamais listé toutes les dépendances — seules celles en problème y figurent"New value: +"Include the full list of all the dependencies in the JSON (`allDependencies`, default: true). No effect on `formattedReport`: that text report has never listed all the dependencies — only those with problems appear in it"
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, and the description adds genuinely new behavioral context: the three extra payloads are PERMANENT state, they are findings rather than mutations ("nothing is touched in the 'actions' content block"), and "fields absent = nothing to report, which does not mean 'I did not look'". That last clarification is exactly the kind of disambiguation annotations cannot carry.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The purpose and trigger are front-loaded, but the body is several very long run-on sentences with shouted emphasis (PERMANENT, WHOLE, THE SAME block) that are costly to parse. The detail is substantive, but it is not tight, and much of the return-field prose could be compressed.

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 no output schema, the description carries the full burden of explaining returns and does so thoroughly, including three non-obvious diagnostic collections and the semantics of absent fields. It is complete for calling the tool correctly, though the trigger/routing vs the validate_* family remains unaddressed.

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 includeAllDeps, includeAllCells and expectedProjectId are already documented in detail (including that expectedProjectId actually retargets the call and is refused without access). The description adds no parameter-level semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource ("Analyzes the state of the canvas") and enumerates the concrete problem classes it detects (missing positions, overlaps, invalid references, orphans, broken dependencies), which is more than a restatement of the name. It never distinguishes itself from the many sibling validators/analyzers (validate_arch, validate_journey, analyze_tasks, analyze_data_model), so an agent must infer the boundary.

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?

Explicitly states the trigger: "Serves when the user reports a visual problem or asks for a diagnostic." That is clear usage context, but no exclusion or alternative routing is given — it never says e.g. "use validate_captable for captable rules" or when NOT to call it.

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