Skip to main content
Glama

Uwear

by ai.uwear
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Add to Shoot Board

mcp_add_context

Append items to the Uwear Shoot Board.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
board_idYesThe open Shoot Board's board_id, from Open Shoot Board or your context.
board_versionNoPass 2 to receive board v2 state, including the board's output settings
context_itemsYesShoot Board items to append to the current list
expected_revisionYesBoard revision this write is based on; a stale revision returns a revision_conflict error with the current board instead of overwriting it

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed9 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / board_id
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The open Shoot Board's board_id, from Open Shoot Board or your context.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / board_version
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Pass 2 to receive board v2 state, including the board's output settings",
+  "enum": [
+    2
+  ],
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / context_items / items / properties / description
      Added value: +{
+  "maxLength": 500,
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / context_items / items / properties / gender
      Added value: +{
+  "maxLength": 40,
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / context_items / items / properties / intake
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Board v2: intake state of an item still being sorted; absent means ready",
+  "properties": {
+    "candidates": {
+      "items": {
+        "enum": [
+          "clothing",
+          "models",
+          "outfits",
+          "generations",
+          "files",
+          "locations",
+          "art_directions",
+          "automations"
+        ],
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "source_hash": {
+      "description": "sha256 hex of the source file",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "enum": [
+        "sorting",
+        "needs_answer",
+        "ready"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "status"
+  ],
+  "type": [
+    "object",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / context_items / items / properties / meta
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Short display facts, e.g. ['female', 'ID 7']",
+  "items": {
+    "type": [
+      "string",
+      "number",
+      "boolean"
+    ]
+  },
+  "maxItems": 8,
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / context_items / items / properties / type / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "clothing",
-  "models",
-  "outfits",
-  "generations",
-  "files",
-  "locations"
-]New value: +[
+  "clothing",
+  "models",
+  "outfits",
+  "generations",
+  "files",
+  "locations",
+  "art_directions",
+  "automations"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / expected_revision
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Board revision this write is based on; a stale revision returns a revision_conflict error with the current board instead of overwriting it",
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "context_items"
-]New value: +[
+  "context_items",
+  "board_id",
+  "expected_revision"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and destructiveHint=false. The word 'Append' is consistent with that additive profile but adds no new behavioral information such as the revision-conflict safety mechanism, what happens on stale revisions, or whether duplicate items are merged.

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?

A single short sentence with zero waste, front-loading the verb and resource. It is efficient, though its terseness is the source of the coverage gaps noted elsewhere rather than a structural flaw.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a multi-parameter write tool with nested context_items, intake states, enum-constrained item types, and a revision-conflict protocol, one sentence is not enough. The description never surfaces the concurrency guard (expected_revision) or the item taxonomy, leaving the agent to reconstruct intent entirely from the schema.

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 board_id, expected_revision, board_version, and the context_items shape. The description adds nothing beyond the schema, which is the baseline 3 case when structured fields do the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Append items to the Uwear Shoot Board.' An agent can tell this is an additive write to a board. However, it does not distinguish itself from close siblings like modify_shoot_board, show_in_shoot_board, or mcp_replace_context, which an agent must choose between.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of the obvious alternatives (mcp_replace_context for replacing, mcp_clear_context for clearing, modify_shoot_board for edits). The agent is left to infer from the name alone when appending is the right call.

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

All Uwear 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