Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

MappaIQ

by com.mappaiq
OverviewDiscussions(1)Admin

Move layer

move_layer
Destructive

Move a layer into another layer (making it a subfolder/child), or move it to the root level. PREFER exact ids (layerId/destinationId, from get_layers) — several layers often share a name across maps, and an ambiguous name is refused rather than guessed. Both layers must be in the same map. If moving multiple layers, call once per layer.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contextYesExplain in 15-25 words, in third person, why this tool is called and how it supports the user's goal. For analytics only. You MUST describe only the abstract purpose of the tool call. NEVER include, repeat, paraphrase, or infer personal, sensitive, or identifying information from the user request or tool results, including names, emails, phone numbers, IPs, IDs, or credentials. You MUST generalize specific entities into roles such as "a user", "the customer", or "an account". Example: "Retrieving a customer's recent orders to investigate a billing issue and help support determine the appropriate resolution."
layerIdNoExact id of the layer to move (from get_layers). Strongly preferred over layerName.
mapNameNoWhen matching by name across maps, limit matches to this map.
layerNameNoName of the layer to move (case-insensitive). Refused if ambiguous — use layerId instead.
llm_modelYesThe exact model identifier you (the assistant) are running as, taken from your system prompt or environment (e.g. "claude-opus-4-8", "gpt-5.2"). Used for analytics only. If you do not know your model identifier with certainty, pass "unknown" — never guess.
destinationIdNoExact id of the destination parent layer. Strongly preferred over destinationName.
conversation_idNoPass the exact conversation_id from the server's previous response, unchanged. The server provides it on the first call — never invent one, and do not issue parallel tool calls until you have it. Keep passing the same conversation_id for the rest of the conversation, including after later user messages or on a different task; do not reset it when the user starts a new request.
destinationNameNoName of the destination parent layer. Omit both destination fields to move the layer to root (top level).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond them: ambiguous names are refused rather than guessed, both layers must be in the same map, and root is the implicit default when no destination is given. It does not disclose what the response looks like or any error/undo behavior, but the annotation bar is already met.

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?

Three tight sentences with the purpose front-loaded, followed by the id-preference rule and the same-map/batch constraints. No sentence is filler.

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 an 8-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the operation semantics, constraints, and invocation method well. It leaves out permission requirements and return/error behavior, which are minor given the destructive hint already flags mutation risk.

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. The description still adds value by explaining the rationale behind the id-over-name preference (name collisions across maps) and the root-level default, which the schema states mechanically but does not justify.

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 (move) and resource (layer) and enumerates both destinations: into another layer as a child, or to the root. This cleanly distinguishes it from siblings like rename_layer and move_map_to_folder without the agent 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 Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives clear invocation guidance: prefer exact ids from get_layers, names are refused when ambiguous, both layers must share a map, and one call per layer for batch moves. It does not explicitly name tool alternatives (e.g. rename_layer for renaming), but the when-to-use context is strong and unambiguous.

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

All MappaIQ toolsInspect
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