Kadal Deck

How to publish a deck

publish_deck

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get the exact commands to build and publish a deck project to this workspace. This server can't build MDX, so it returns steps to run on the computer that has the project (or points to the local kadal-deck mcp server). Use it when the person wants to publish a new deck or a project's changes; use start_quick_edit then publish_draft instead for a small edit to a deck already published with its source, and update_deck for settings. Read-only: it publishes nothing.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "publish_deck"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`slug`	No	The slug to publish as; the steps then name it and say whether that deck already exists (publishing adds a version) or will be new. Omit to use the project folder's name.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`docs`	Yes
`steps`	Yes
`workspace`	Yes
`localServer`	Yes
`canBuildHere`	Yes
`existingDeck`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 25, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / slug / description

Previous value: -"The deck's slug (default: the project folder's name)."New value: +"The slug to publish as; the steps then name it and say whether that deck already exists (publishing adds a version) or will be new. Omit to use the project folder's name."

First observedOct 25, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds context they cannot: this server cannot build MDX, so it returns steps for the machine holding the project or points at the local `kadal-deck mcp` server. That is the key behavioral trait an agent could otherwise misread as a real publish. It stops short of discussing permissions or failure modes, so not a 5.

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, all load-bearing: capability first, then the MDX constraint, then routing. The routing sentence is dense but each clause maps to a distinct sibling. Slightly crowded, but no filler.

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

Completeness5/5

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

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, there is one optional parameter, and the tool is read-only. The description covers what an agent needs before calling: what it returns (commands, not a publish), why, and which tool to use instead.

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% and the single optional `slug` parameter is thoroughly documented in the schema, including the omit-to-default behavior. The description adds only the phrase 'to this workspace' and no slug-specific syntax or format detail, so the schema does the heavy lifting — baseline 3.

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 ('Get the exact commands to build and publish a deck project') and immediately scopes it to this workspace. It names the siblings it is not (start_quick_edit, publish_draft, update_deck), so an agent can separate it from the other publish-adjacent tools without opening a 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?

Gives an explicit use case ('when the person wants to publish a new deck or a project's changes') and explicit exclusions with the alternative for each: start_quick_edit then publish_draft for small edits to an already-published deck, update_deck for settings. Nothing is left to inference.

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

All Kadal Deck tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.