Soleil Clusters

Arrange board

arrange_board

DestructiveIdempotent

ARRANGES cards already on a board. "auto" (default) lays each section (group) out as its own block, notes in columns and pictures in rows, every picture whole, and sets the sections out to suit the board; it also brings notes the API made earlier up to date. order lists card ids to put first. "justified" fits rows flush on both edges, "masonry" is colour-ordered columns, "grid" uniform cells, "row" and "column" single lines. Omit card_ids for the whole board.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "board_id": "<board_id>"
    },
    "name": "arrange_board"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`gap`	No	Space between cards, default 24
`draft`	No	The draft key create_boards returned. Pass it on every call about that draft.
`order`	No	Card ids to put first, in order. Those in no section come first, at the top-left
`width`	No	Block width (not auto); default roughly square
`layout`	No	Default auto
`columns`	No	Column cap, grid and masonry only
`dry_run`	No	Show the layout; change nothing
`board_id`	Yes	The board
`card_ids`	No	Omit to arrange everything
`row_height`	No	Target row height, justified only

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`cards`	No
`bounds`	No
`layout`	No
`arranged`	No
`repaired`	No
`sections`	No
`arrangement`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 9, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / draft

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The draft key create_boards returned. Pass it on every call about that draft.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered externally. The description adds a genuine side effect ('brings notes the API made earlier up to date') for auto layout, but never warns that existing card positions are overwritten or mentions dry_run as the non-destructive way to preview, which is the most consequential behavior for a destructive tool.

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?

The core action is front-loaded and the layout modes are packed economically, appropriate for a 10-parameter tool. A few clauses are so compressed they become cryptic, notably 'it also brings notes the API made earlier up to date', which costs a reading pass.

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?

With an output schema present and 100% schema description coverage, the description need not explain return values or the remaining numeric params. It covers the layout semantics and scoping well; the one material gap is that it never says the previous arrangement is replaced, which matters for a destructive operation.

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 the baseline would be 3, yet the description meaningfully expands the terse enum ('justified' fits rows flush on both edges, 'masonry' is colour-ordered columns, 'grid' uniform cells, 'row'/'column' single lines) beyond what the schema's 'Default auto' conveys. It also clarifies the ordering rule for 'order' (cards in no section go top-left) that the schema does not state.

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 description opens with a specific verb and resource ('ARRANGES cards already on a board') and the qualifier 'already on a board' implicitly separates it from add_cards and move_cards. It does not name any sibling explicitly, so an agent must infer the boundary rather than being told it.

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?

There is useful in-tool guidance ('Omit card_ids for the whole board', 'auto' is the default, 'order' puts cards first), but nothing tells the agent when to pick this over move_cards or add_cards, nor when a non-auto layout is appropriate. Usage is implied by the layout enumeration rather than stated as selection criteria.

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

All Soleil Clusters 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.