Pane

Manage UI Taste Notes

taste

Destructive

The agent's UI taste notes: a short freeform markdown document of presentation preferences gathered from human feedback, such as 'denser layout' or 'no rounded corners'. Reading it before generating or revising an app is what carries earlier feedback into new output. Actions: get returns the current document; set replaces it in whole, so it does not append; clear discards it. Scoped to presentation preferences rather than general storage.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`taste`	No	The full markdown notes (required for set; whole-document replace, not append).
`action`	Yes	The agent's freeform UI taste notes (markdown) — presentation preferences learned from human feedback. get: read them before generating an app. set: whole-document replace (taste, non-empty). clear: delete them.

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description explicitly discloses behavioral traits beyond annotations: 'set replaces it in whole, so it does not append; clear discards it.' This aligns with the destructiveHint annotation (true) and provides necessary detail about the replace (non-append) behavior, ensuring the agent understands the tool's effects.

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 concise at three sentences plus action definitions. It front-loads the purpose and scope, with no redundant information. Every sentence contributes meaning, making it easy for an agent to process efficiently.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema), the description covers all necessary context: what taste notes are, when to read them, how each action works, and the scope. The annotations provide destructive hint, but the description adds the critical detail that set is a full replacement. Complete for correct invocation.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that the 'set' action replaces the whole document and requires non-empty taste. This goes beyond the schema's description by emphasizing the 'whole-document replace' behavior, preventing misinterpretation as append.

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 clearly states what the tool does: manages a freeform markdown document of UI taste notes. It specifies the actions (get, set, clear) and distinguishes it from general storage by scoping it to presentation preferences. This avoids confusion with sibling tools like update_row.

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?

The description explains when to use the tool: 'Reading it before generating or revising an app is what carries earlier feedback into new output.' It also clarifies that it is for presentation preferences only, not general storage. While it doesn't explicitly list alternatives, the context is clear enough for correct usage.

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

All Pane tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct resource or action: row operations (get/list/upsert/update/delete/restore) are clearly separated, while apps, attachments, community, grants, ingest, members, publisher, review, and taste each cover a different domain. Even closely related actions like share_link_rotate and domain_set have clearly scoped descriptions, so an agent can reliably select the right tool.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names use two patterns: noun-like names for resource areas (apps, attachments, community, grants, ingest, members) and verb_noun names for row operations (upsert_row, delete_row, etc.). This deviation is predictable and readable, but it is not perfectly uniform, so a slight deduction applies.

Tool Count4/5

With 22 tools, the server is on the heavier side, but the breadth of the platform (app lifecycle, data storage, attachments, community, reviews, feedback, identity) justifies the count. Each tool represents a meaningful feature area with multiple internal actions, so none feels redundant.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the full lifecycle for apps (create, read, update, delete), rows (create, read, update, delete, restore, list deleted), attachments, membership, grants, ingest, community, and reviews. Obvious gaps like rollback or version history are not core to the domain, and the presence of get_skill helps agents understand the workflow.

Resources

Need Help?