Kadal Deck

Start a quick edit of a deck

start_quick_edit

Idempotent

Open a deck for editing in the web builder: returns the draft already editing it, or one made now from the live version (created says which), and the builder link to give the person, who makes the edits there. Use it for a small content change to a published deck once get_deck_sync says quickEdit: ready; use publish_deck instead to publish a project from the CLI, and publish_draft afterwards to make the edits live. Needs decks:write (60 changes a minute). Changes nothing that viewers see, and calling it again reuses the draft, never resets it. Refused, with the reason, when the deck can't be quick-edited or the plan's builder allowance is used up.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "deck": "<deck>"
    },
    "name": "start_quick_edit"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`deck`	Yes	The deck's id (starts with `d`) or its slug, as list_decks returns them; case-insensitive. A deck outside this workspace fails with “No deck …” — call list_decks.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`rev`	Yes
`draft`	Yes
`builder`	Yes
`created`	Yes
`baseVersion`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 25, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / deck / description

Previous value: -"The deck's id (d…) or its slug, as list_decks shows them."New value: +"The deck's id (starts with `d`) or its slug, as list_decks returns them; case-insensitive. A deck outside this workspace fails with “No deck …” — call list_decks."

First observedOct 25, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond annotations: states it changes nothing viewers see, that re-calling reuses the draft and never resets it (concrete meaning for idempotentHint), the `decks:write` scope, a 60-changes-per-minute rate limit, and that it is refused with a reason when quick-edit is unavailable or the builder allowance is exhausted. These are exactly the operational facts an agent needs.

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?

Purpose and return value are front-loaded, and nearly every clause carries real information. The one long multi-clause sentence mixing return shape with the 'person who makes the edits there' aside is slightly denser than it needs to be.

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?

With an output schema handling return values and annotations covering the safety profile, the description still supplies rate limits, auth scope, idempotency semantics, and refusal conditions. An agent has everything required to decide and call correctly.

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 100% and the single `deck` parameter already documents id-or-slug, case-insensitivity, and the 'No deck …' failure path. The description adds no parameter-level detail 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.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Specific verb and resource: 'Open a deck for editing in the web builder', and it states exactly what comes back (draft already editing it or one made from live version, with `created` distinguishing which) plus the builder link. It is clearly separable from publish_deck and publish_draft, which are named as the alternatives.

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?

Explicit trigger condition ('for a small content change to a published deck once get_deck_sync says `quickEdit: ready`') and explicit exclusions routing to siblings ('use publish_deck instead to publish a project from the CLI, and publish_draft afterwards to make the edits live'). 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.