Uwear

Write Art Direction Markdown (Advanced)

create_art_direction

Create a company ArtDirection markdown document. Use author_art_direction first when the user provides rough creative text or reference images. Use this direct writer only for already-structured markdown that follows the Variation Controls parser contract.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	Name for the ArtDirection
`content_markdown`	Yes	Complete ArtDirection markdown document. Prefer author_art_direction for rough briefs. If writing directly, every reusable alternative that should rotate across generations must live under `## Variation Controls` as `###` controls with `A. Option` lines; do not leave selectable worlds, pose families, or shot-role plans only in prose.
`reference_image_attachments`	No	Authoring reference image attachments to keep with the ArtDirection. These are for iterating the markdown only, not generation-time references.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations are all false, so no protective or destructive hints are present. The description adds the key nuance that this is a direct writer for already-structured markdown, but it does not disclose other behaviors such as validation, overwrite semantics, or return values. The parser contract is also repeated in the schema, so the marginal description value is moderate.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is two sentences: the first states the purpose and the second gives usage guidance. It is front-loaded, scannable, and contains no filler, making it an exemplar of concise yet informative writing.

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 creation tool with no output schema and moderate complexity, the description covers the essential decision of when to use it and what input it expects. It could mention the result of the creation (e.g., saved entity) or any side effects, but the sibling tools and schema fill most gaps. A score of 4 reflects solid but not exhaustive completeness.

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% with detailed explanations for all three parameters. The description does not add extra parameter semantics beyond referencing the parser contract in content_markdown, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 begins with 'Create a company ArtDirection markdown document,' using a specific verb and resource. It immediately distinguishes the tool from its sibling author_art_direction by noting when to prefer that alternative. This makes the purpose clear and uniquely positioned among the tools.

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?

The description explicitly states to use author_art_direction first for rough creative text or reference images, and to use this direct writer only for already-structured markdown that follows the Variation Controls parser contract. This provides clear when-to-use guidance and names the alternative.

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

All Uwear tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Disambiguation3/5

Most tools target distinct resources and have detailed descriptions, but several closely related families exist: create_credit_checkout_session vs mcp_create_credit_checkout_session, the propose_brief/confirm_brief/update_brief lifecycle, and the many avatar/upload entry points. An agent must read long caveats carefully to avoid selecting the wrong tool.

Naming Consistency4/5

The vast majority of tool names follow a predictable snake_case verb_noun pattern (list_*, get_*, create_*, update_*, propose_*). The mcp_* prefix group and varied creation verbs (create/upload/save/add/generate) are minor deviations, though mcp_create_credit_checkout_session duplicating create_credit_checkout_session adds some confusion.

Tool Count1/5

With 67 tools, this is an extreme mismatch by the rubric's own 50+ threshold, far beyond the typical 3-15 well-scoped range. Many tools are narrow lifecycle steps such as two-phase local uploads, app-only montage internals, and multiple ArtDirection authoring variants, making the agent-facing surface very heavy.

Completeness3/5

The core generation, brief, montage, and QA workflows are covered thoroughly with polling and result retrieval. However, notable lifecycle gaps exist: outfits, locations, avatars, and tags mostly have create/list/get but no update or delete, and delete_template is the only delete tool in the entire set.

Resources

Need Help?