MCP Server By TestMu AI

SmartUI Baseline Manage

smartui_baseline_manage

Destructive

Merge SmartUI baselines across branches or builds (to read baseline settings, use smartui_project_query with action=get). merge_branch/merge_build resolve source and target names to builds, merge them, then poll the merged build and report its real terminal status — a merge that lands in error or with zero screenshots is returned as a tool error, not as success. Merging permanently changes baseline state: the merged build takes the baseline flag, so a failed merge leaves the baseline on an empty build.

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": {
      "action": "<action>",
      "project_id": "<project_id>"
    },
    "name": "smartui_baseline_manage"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`action`	Yes	merge_branch merges one branch baseline into another; merge_build merges one build into another
`source`	No	Source branch (merge_branch) or build name (merge_build) to merge FROM
`target`	No	Target branch (merge_branch) or build name (merge_build) to merge INTO
`project_id`	Yes	Project id (required)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 8, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / action / description

Previous value: -"get_settings reads baseline config; merge_branch/merge_build merge baselines"New value: +"merge_branch merges one branch baseline into another; merge_build merges one build into another"

changedInput schema / properties / action / enum

Previous value: -[
-  "get_settings",
-  "merge_branch",
-  "merge_build"
-]New value: +[
+  "merge_branch",
+  "merge_build"
+]

First observedOct 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the destructiveHint annotation by disclosing the merge lifecycle: names resolve to builds, the merged build is polled, terminal status is reported, and error/zero-screenshot outcomes surface as tool errors rather than success. Critically warns that the merged build takes the baseline flag, so a failed merge leaves the baseline on an empty build — a non-obvious destructive consequence.

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, front-loaded with purpose and the read alternative before behavioral detail. Dense but every clause (polling, error semantics, baseline-flag side effect) carries information an agent needs. Slightly packed, but no waste.

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?

For a destructive, multi-mode mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers what the tool does, when to use it vs the read sibling, how success/failure is signaled, and the lasting state change. Nothing an agent needs to call it safely is missing.

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% (baseline 3), but the description adds meaning: source/target are names that get resolved to builds, and merge_branch vs merge_build reinterpret those same fields as branches or build names. This clarifies the enum-conditional parameter semantics beyond the schema text.

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 (merge) and resource (SmartUI baselines) with scope (across branches or builds), and explicitly distinguishes itself from the read-path sibling smartui_project_query. An agent can identify this as the mutation counterpart to the SmartUI query 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?

Explicitly routes the agent: 'to read baseline settings, use smartui_project_query with action=get', and names the two merge modes (merge_branch/merge_build) with their distinct source/target semantics. When-to-use and the alternative for the read case are both stated.

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

All MCP Server By TestMu AI 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?