Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Designers

by com.allthepossibles
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Design changelog

write_design_changelog
Read-only

Builds a changelog from two lists. Pass before and after as lines (name: value or just name) or JSON (flat or nested objects, W3C-style tokens with $value, or arrays of names). Returns added items grouped by prefix, changed values phrased with the real change (color from-to, pixel difference), probable renames guessed from similar names or identical values (confirm each), removed items, counts, and a suggested semantic-version bump (removals and renames suggest major, additions minor, value changes patch; a convention). Optional version and title head the output. It compares only the text you give it and cannot see visual changes that are not in the lists.

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": {
      "before": "<before>",
      "after": "<after>"
    },
    "name": "write_design_changelog"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
afterYesThe later list.
titleNoOptional heading.
beforeYesThe earlier list.
versionNoOptional version label.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnly, non-destructive, closed-world), and the description adds substantial value beyond them: it describes the return structure (added items grouped by prefix, changed values phrased with real deltas, probable renames, counts, semver suggestion), the semver convention used, and that rename guesses need confirmation. It also discloses a real limitation about scope of comparison.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and inputs, then return shape, then caveat. The middle sentence is long and packs many clauses, but each clause carries distinct information (output sections, semver rules, rename confirmation) rather than padding.

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 no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so thoroughly, including the semver heuristic and the confirm-renames caveat. All four parameters are addressed, so an agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema descriptions are terse ('The later list.'), and the description compensates by defining the accepted grammar for before/after: 'name: value', plain names, flat or nested JSON, W3C tokens with $value, and arrays. It also explains that version and title are optional and head the output, which the schema only gestures at.

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 ('Builds a changelog from two lists') plus the exact inputs it consumes. No sibling tool does changelog generation, so it is unambiguous against the rest of the catalog.

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?

Gives clear context for use: pass before/after as lines or JSON, and it explicitly notes the tool 'cannot see visual changes that are not in the lists', which is an implicit when-not-to-use. It doesn't name an alternative tool for the visual-diff case, but none exists in the sibling list, so the gap is minor.

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

All Designers toolsInspect
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.

Resources