Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

api-evangelist

by com.apievangelist
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

apply_overlay

Read-only

Apply an OpenAPI Overlay to a document and report what each action matched. Use it for deprecation and migration choreography without forking the contract.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contextNoOptional: why you are asking. One sentence — the task you are trying to complete, or what you expect to get back. Never included in the answer and never used to rank; it is read only when a result turns out to be wrong, which is when knowing the intent is what makes the report actionable.
overlayYesAn OpenAPI Overlay document whose actions are applied to `document`.
documentYesThe API description to operate on — OpenAPI, AsyncAPI, Arazzo or JSON Schema. A YAML/JSON string or an already-parsed object; both are accepted.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / context
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional: why you are asking. One sentence — the task you are trying to complete, or what you expect to get back. Never included in the answer and never used to rank; it is read only when a result turns out to be wrong, which is when knowing the intent is what makes the report actionable.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / document
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The API description to operate on — OpenAPI, AsyncAPI, Arazzo or JSON Schema. A YAML/JSON string or an already-parsed object; both are accepted.",
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "object"
+  ]
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / overlay
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "An OpenAPI Overlay document whose actions are applied to `document`.",
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "object"
+  ]
+}
  3. Added

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the tool reports per-action match results rather than silently transforming, which is useful, but it doesn't describe failure modes, partial matches, or the report shape. Adequate against annotation coverage, not rich.

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?

Two sentences, zero waste, with the action front-loaded and the use case following. Nothing redundant with the title or annotations.

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 read-only analysis tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers purpose, outcome, and usage context. It could go further on what the match report contains, but an agent has enough to invoke it 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 description coverage is 100%, so all three parameters (including the unusual 'context' intent field) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax or format detail about document/overlay beyond what the schema states, so the baseline 3 applies.

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: applying an OpenAPI Overlay to a document, plus the outcome ('report what each action matched'). No sibling tool overlaps with overlay application, so differentiation is implicit rather than stated. Clear and specific, but it doesn't explicitly route away from related tools like diff_api_versions.

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?

The second sentence gives a concrete use context ('deprecation and migration choreography without forking the contract'), which tells the agent when this is the right pick. It offers no explicit when-not conditions or named alternatives, keeping it below a 5.

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

All api-evangelist 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