Oviond

Add text widget

add_text_widget

Add a rich-text widget to a page. Position, width, and height use sensible defaults.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`text`	No	Plain-text content. Defaults to empty.
`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 text widget 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. A failure comes back as an error result instead.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

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 text widget 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

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate this is a non-read-only, non-destructive operation. The description adds one behavioral detail: the tool automatically applies default values for position, width, and height. However, it leaves 'sensible defaults' undefined and does not disclose any side effects or prerequisites.

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?

The description is a single sentence with a front-loaded action clause and a short clarifying detail. It is concise, contains no redundant wording, and every word contributes value beyond what the schema and annotations already provide.

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 a simple creation tool with a complete output schema and full parameter documentation, the one-sentence description is largely sufficient. The only real gap is that 'sensible defaults' is vague, but the agent can still invoke the tool correctly based on the provided schema and the description's core purpose.

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 each parameter is already documented (e.g., page_id from list_pages, client_id from list_clients). The description contributes by explaining that position, width, and height parameters are not needed because defaults are applied, but it does not add meaning to the existing schema properties beyond that.

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 uses a specific verb ('Add') and resource ('rich-text widget') along with a placement target ('to a page'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_button_widget or add_image_widget, since 'rich-text' names the widget subtype and the description is not a tautology.

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?

The description does not mention any alternative tools or explicitly state when to use this versus other add_*_widget siblings. It gives a contextual hint that position, width, and height use sensible defaults, which implies the tool is meant for quick adds without custom layout needs, but it is not an explicit routing guideline.

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?