Oviond

Add goal widget

add_goal_widget

Add a Goal widget to a page: a progress gauge showing a demo target until it points at a saved goal. Returns the new widget_id — point it at a goal with update_goal_widget, using an id from list_goals. The goal carries its own metric query, target and comparison, so the widget needs no metrics or dimensions. Position, width and height match the editor's Goal card.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page_id`	Yes	Page ID the widget will be placed on, from list_pages.
`client_id`	Yes	Client ID the report belongs to (from list_clients).
`source_id`	Yes	Report ID the widget belongs to (from list_reports).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	No	The goal widget, still on a demo target until a goal is picked, that was added — widget_id, plus the stored row with the defaults the server filled in (position, width, height).
`success`	Yes	True when the call succeeded.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 5, 2026

removedInput schema / $schema

Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"

removedOutput schema / $schema

Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"

changedOutput schema / properties / success / description

Previous value: -"True when the call succeeded. A failure comes back as an error result instead."New value: +"True when the call succeeded."

Changed1 schema field changedSep 18, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "additionalProperties": {},
+      "description": "The goal widget, still on a demo target until a goal is picked, that was added — widget_id, plus the stored row with the defaults the server filled in (position, width, height).",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "success": {
+      "description": "True when the call succeeded. A failure comes back as an error result instead.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "success"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 18, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description reveals that the widget initially shows a demo target until pointed at a saved goal, that it returns widget_id, and that layout matches the editor's Goal card. These behaviors go beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) and help the agent predict side effects and follow-up actions.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then return value/workflow, then rationale and layout. No filler; each sentence adds distinct value.

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 create-style tool with a documented output schema and fully described parameters, the description covers the widget's initial state, follow-up call, and layout behavior. Nothing essential is missing for an agent 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 the schema already documents page_id, client_id, and source_id. The description adds context about the goal carrying its own query/target/comparison but doesn't add parameter-level detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource ('Add a Goal widget to a page') and immediately characterizes the widget as a progress gauge with a demo target. It distinguishes this from sibling add_*_widget tools by explaining that the goal carries its own metric query, target, and comparison, so no metrics/dimensions are needed.

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?

It provides clear context for when to use it: to add a Goal widget, and it routes the next step to update_goal_widget with an id from list_goals. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the workflow and 'no metrics or dimensions' note distinguish it from data widgets.

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

All Oviond 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?