opointo

Propose an app design

propose_app

Your agent can design an app with you: send an app in opointo's design format (the AppSpec emit_app builds from) and get back a link that opens it in the Designer as a new, unsaved design. The person sees every screen, changes what they like, and hands it back for emit_app. into: the code in the person's line; it lands in their open design. dryRun checks without making a link; format: true returns the format and every block, "photos" the sample photos, or with app: { version: 1 } a short plan's.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`app`	No	The design: { name, tabs: [{ screenId, label }], screens: [{ id, name, composition: { screen: { content: { children: [node] }, chrome: { header?, headerItems?, floating: [] }, overlays: [] } } }], onboardingScreenIds: [], pushed: [{ screenId, fromScreenId, presentation }], theme? }. A node is { id, slug, props }: slug is "wireframe:<block>" such as "wireframe:list-row" (a list whose rows open one screen is one row block with repeats: "true" and its sample rows in rows: [{ title, ... }]) or a component from find_component, and a content node opens a screen with navigate: { to, presentation } beside its props. A top bar is header: { id, slug: "header", props: {} }, titled by the screen's name; a sheet has none. entryScreenId is only for a splash screen before the tabs. Titles and composition metadata are set by the builder.
`into`	No
`dryRun`	No	check the design and report, without making a link
`format`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 14, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / app / description

Previous value: -"The design: { name, tabs: [{ screenId, label }], screens: [{ id, name, composition: { screen: { content: { children: [node] }, chrome: { header?, headerItems?, floating: [] }, overlays: [] } } }], onboardingScreenIds: [], pushed: [{ screenId, fromScreenId, presentation }], theme? }. A node is { id, slug, props }: slug is \"wireframe:<block>\" such as \"wireframe:list-row\" (a list whose rows open one screen is one row block with repeats: \"true\" and its sample rows in rows: [{ title, ... }]) or a component from find_component, and a content node opens a screen with navigate: { to, presentation } beside its props. A top bar is header: { id, slug: \"header\", props: {} }, titled by the screen's name; a sheet has none. entryScreenId is only for a splash screen before the tabs. Tab icons, titles and composition metadata are set by the builder."New value: +"The design: { name, tabs: [{ screenId, label }], screens: [{ id, name, composition: { screen: { content: { children: [node] }, chrome: { header?, headerItems?, floating: [] }, overlays: [] } } }], onboardingScreenIds: [], pushed: [{ screenId, fromScreenId, presentation }], theme? }. A node is { id, slug, props }: slug is \"wireframe:<block>\" such as \"wireframe:list-row\" (a list whose rows open one screen is one row block with repeats: \"true\" and its sample rows in rows: [{ title, ... }]) or a component from find_component, and a content node opens a screen with navigate: { to, presentation } beside its props. A top bar is header: { id, slug: \"header\", props: {} }, titled by the screen's name; a sheet has none. entryScreenId is only for a splash screen before the tabs. Titles and composition metadata are set by the builder."

changedInput schema / properties / format / type

Previous value: -"boolean"New value: +[
+  "boolean",
+  "string"
+]

Changed1 schema field changedOct 12, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / into
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 2, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / app / description

Previous value: -"The design: { name, tabs: [{ screenId, label }], screens: [{ id, name, composition: { screen: { content: { children: [node] }, chrome: { header?, headerItems?, floating: [] }, overlays: [] } } }], onboardingScreenIds: [], pushed: [{ screenId, fromScreenId, presentation }], theme? }. A node is { id, slug, props }: slug is a component from list_components or \"wireframe:<block>\" such as \"wireframe:list-row\" (a list whose rows open one screen is one row with repeats: \"true\"), and a content node opens a screen with navigate: { to, presentation }. A top bar is header: { id, slug: \"header\", props: {} }, titled by the screen's name. entryScreenId is only for a splash screen before the tabs. Tab icons, titles and composition metadata are set by the builder."New value: +"The design: { name, tabs: [{ screenId, label }], screens: [{ id, name, composition: { screen: { content: { children: [node] }, chrome: { header?, headerItems?, floating: [] }, overlays: [] } } }], onboardingScreenIds: [], pushed: [{ screenId, fromScreenId, presentation }], theme? }. A node is { id, slug, props }: slug is \"wireframe:<block>\" such as \"wireframe:list-row\" (a list whose rows open one screen is one row block with repeats: \"true\" and its sample rows in rows: [{ title, ... }]) or a component from find_component, and a content node opens a screen with navigate: { to, presentation } beside its props. A top bar is header: { id, slug: \"header\", props: {} }, titled by the screen's name; a sheet has none. entryScreenId is only for a splash screen before the tabs. Tab icons, titles and composition metadata are set by the builder."

addedInput schema / properties / format
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```
removedInput schema / required
```
Removed value: -[
-  "app"
-]
```

AddedSep 29, 2026

TDQS

B3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and non-idempotency, so the safety bar is lower. The description usefully adds that the result is an unsaved design and that dryRun avoids producing a link, but the 'into' behavior ('it lands in their open design') is murky and suggests an in-place mutation that is never clearly explained.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The first sentence is a reasonable front-loaded opener, but the remainder degenerates into run-on, grammatically broken fragments ('into: the code in the person's line;', 'a short plan's.'). The content is short but its structure impedes parsing rather than serving conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a nested-object, mutation-ish tool with no output schema and 4 params, the description does cover the key return (a Designer link), the unsaved state, and dryRun semantics. It leaves the 'into' write path and error/failure behavior unexplained, so it is adequate but not complete.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 50%, so the description must compensate. The 'format' explanation adds genuine value by naming the 'photos' and 'app: {version: 1}' plan variants not in the schema, but the 'into' gloss ('the code in the person's line; it lands in their open design') is too fragmented to clarify the parameter's type or meaning. Net compensation is weak.

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?

The opening states a specific action and resource: send an app spec in opointo's format and receive a link that opens it in the Designer as a new, unsaved design. It also implicitly differentiates from emit_app by framing this as the proposal step that hands back for emit_app. The clarity is undercut by garbled later sentences, but the core purpose is unmistakable.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It sketches the workflow ('the person sees every screen, changes what they like, and hands it back for emit_app') and mentions dryRun as a check-only mode, which implies when to use it. However, there is no explicit when-not guidance and the sibling relationship to emit_app and propose_screen is only obliquely implied.

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

All opointo tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Propose an app design

Input Schema

Schema Changelog

TDQS

Glama MCP Gateway

Resources