CalderFlow

create_funnel_chart

Create a funnel chart for filtering/narrowing processes where quantities reduce per stage (conversion funnels, pipelines). Include stage values when numbers are available; set conversionRates for proportional widths.

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": {
      "title": "<title>",
      "stages": "<stages>"
    },
    "name": "create_funnel_chart"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`title`	Yes	Chart title shown in the app and share page.
`stages`	Yes	Ordered stages from widest (top) to narrowest (bottom). 3-6 is ideal.
`conversionRates`	No	Conversion percentages between adjacent stages (length = stages - 1), e.g. [75, 50, 30].

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 15, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose rendering semantics beyond the schema (conversionRates drives proportional widths, stage values should be included when numbers exist), but says nothing about creation side effects, permissions, mutation of existing charts, or what the call returns.

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 compact sentences with the purpose and the call criteria front-loaded; every clause carries information an agent needs before invoking the tool.

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?

Adequate for a three-parameter chart-creation tool with a fully documented schema and no output schema. The remaining gap is mutation behavior and expected result, which matters more here because no annotations backfill it.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds cross-parameter meaning: pair numeric values with stage values and use conversionRates specifically to control proportional widths. It doesn't restate the length = stages - 1 constraint, but the schema already carries that.

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 ("Create a funnel chart") and pins down the shape of data it is for: filtering/narrowing processes where quantities reduce per stage. It does not name or contrast any sibling such as create_chevron_chart or create_lifecycle_chart, so differentiation is only implicit in the use-case clause.

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 a clear selection criterion (conversion funnels, pipelines, quantities shrinking per stage), which is enough to route an agent away from lifecycle/timeline charts by meaning. It stops short of explicit exclusions or naming an alternative tool for non-funnel cases.

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

All CalderFlow tools Inspect

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

Need Help?