Skip to main content
Glama

Playbook

by com.playbook
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Ungroup assets

ungroup_assets
Destructive

Pull assets out of the group they belong to, leaving them as standalone assets on the board. A group is a container asset that holds other assets as variants — different formats or crops of the same thing, or a set of colour swatches, which Playbook shows as a palette. The group has no file of its own and takes its preview from its first displayable child. Requires a token with the write scope. Every token must name an asset that is currently inside a group — one that is not makes the whole call fail. IMPORTANT: a group left with fewer than two assets is dissolved — its last asset is freed too and the group asset is deleted. So ungrouping one member of a two-member group frees both, and the returned list names only the assets you asked for, not every asset that changed. Re-read the group with get_asset if you need its current state.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
organizationNoWorkspace slug, as returned by list_organizations. Omit it when the account has a single workspace — it is then resolved from your token. Pass it only when the account has several, or when you mean a workspace other than the obvious one.
child_asset_tokensYesTokens of the grouped assets to pull out

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • removedInput schema / properties / context
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Explain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): \"Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization.\"",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "child_asset_tokens",
-  "context"
-]New value: +[
+  "child_asset_tokens"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and non-idempotent, but the description adds the non-obvious behavioral core: a group dropping below two assets is dissolved, the last asset is freed, the group asset is deleted, and the returned list names only requested assets rather than everything changed. Auth scope and failure mode are also disclosed.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loads the action and then layers requirement, destructive caveat, and return-value note in a logical order. It is longer than typical and the group-definition aside is arguably expendable, but nearly every sentence carries load-bearing information.

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 destructive mutation with no output schema, the description covers the safety scope, the error case, the surprising cascade deletion, and what the return list actually contains. An agent has enough to invoke it correctly and anticipate side effects.

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 baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning to child_asset_tokens by constraining each token to an asset currently inside a group and explaining the all-or-nothing failure. The organization parameter's behavior is left entirely to the schema, keeping it from a 5.

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 concrete verb+resource ('pull assets out of the group... leaving them as standalone assets') and even defines what a group is, which disambiguates it from sibling tools like group_assets and get_asset. An agent knows exactly what state change this produces without 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 explicit preconditions (write scope required; every token must name an asset currently inside a group; the call fails otherwise) and warns to re-read with get_asset for current state. It stops short of naming the inverse sibling (group_assets) or when to prefer re-reading over ungrouping, so it is strong but not fully routing.

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

All Playbook 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