Skip to main content
Glama

Tomorrow Lives Engines

by com.tomorrowlives
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Edit a form

form_apply

Applies a batch of ops (set_form, set_generator, set_range, reset_range, clear_params) to a form document, whole or not at all. Costs 1 unit.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
opsYesThe edits to apply in order, each an object with an op name (set_form, set_generator, set_range, reset_range, clear_params). The batch applies whole or not at all.
formYesThe form document, written inline as JSON.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
msNoMilliseconds the run took.
jobYesThe job id; the job tool reads it.
verbNoThe tool that made it.
filesNoFiles made, each with a name, type, size and a signed URL.
unitsNoUnits this call cost.
resultNoThe engine's own answer, a JSON document.
statusNoqueued when the job runs in the background.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / form / description
      Added value: +"The form document, written inline as JSON."
    • addedInput schema / properties / ops / description
      Added value: +"The edits to apply in order, each an object with an op name (set_form, set_generator, set_range, reset_range, clear_params). The batch applies whole or not at all."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "files": {
+      "description": "Files made, each with a name, type, size and a signed URL.",
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": {},
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "job": {
+      "description": "The job id; the job tool reads it.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "ms": {
+      "description": "Milliseconds the run took.",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "result": {
+      "description": "The engine's own answer, a JSON document."
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "description": "queued when the job runs in the background.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "units": {
+      "description": "Units this call cost.",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "verb": {
+      "description": "The tool that made it.",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "job"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly=false, destructive=false, idempotent=false), so the bar is lower, and the description still adds two genuinely non-redundant facts: the batch is atomic (all-or-nothing) and the call costs 1 unit. It stops short of mentioning permissions or failure/rollback behavior.

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?

One tight sentence that front-loads the action, then the op vocabulary, then the atomicity guarantee and cost. Nothing is wasted and no sentence is padding.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, and atomicity plus cost are disclosed. However, the description never says where the inline 'form' document comes from (form_build/form_starter or a fetch), which is the main practical uncertainty for invoking a mutation tool that takes the whole document inline.

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 both 'ops' and 'form' are already documented in the schema, including the same op-name list and the whole-or-not-at-all note. The description adds no syntax, format, or constraint detail (e.g. the 200-item cap) beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 gives a specific verb (applies a batch of ops) and resource (a form document), and enumerates the exact op names, so the agent knows this is the mutation entry point for forms. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings such as form_build or form_check, leaving that differentiation to the tool name alone.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no when-to-use versus when-not-to-use guidance and no alternative tool is named, even though form_build, form_check, and form_starter sit right next to it. The 'whole or not at all' clause describes atomicity, not when this tool should be selected.

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

All Tomorrow Lives Engines 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