Skip to main content
Glama

vgraph-mcp

by com.vithanco
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

create_ibis

Create a IBIS diagram as PNG image. IBIS (Issue-Based Information System) maps out any decision, discussion, or thought process using just four node types: Questions, Answers (Ideas), Pros, and Cons. Attaching Questions to any node lets you drill into any aspect at any depth.

You provide VGL (Vithanco Graph Language) code using the IBIS notation and the tool renders it to an PNG image.

How to Build an IBIS Diagram

  1. Start with a root Question (used as the graph title).

  2. Add Answers (Ideas) that respond to the question.

  3. Add Pro and Con arguments for each answer.

  4. Attach further Questions to any node to drill deeper.

  5. Keep going until the topic is explored to the depth you need.

VGL Syntax

vgraph <id>: IBIS "<title>" {
    <nodes and edges>
}

Node Types

  • Question — a question or issue to explore (purple, question mark icon)

  • Answer — an idea or proposed answer (amber, lightbulb icon)

  • Pro — an argument in favour of an answer (green, thumbs up icon)

  • Con — an argument against an answer (red, thumbs down icon)

node <id>: Question "<label>"
node <id>: Answer "<label>"
node <id>: Pro "<label>"
node <id>: Con "<label>"

Edges

Edge types are inferred from node types — just write edge <from> -> <to>.

Valid connections:

  • Question -> Answer (answering the question)

  • Answer -> Pro (supporting argument)

  • Answer -> Con (opposing argument)

  • Question -> Question (sub-question of a question)

  • Answer -> Question (answer raises new question)

  • Pro -> Question (pro raises new question)

  • Con -> Question (con raises new question)

edge <from_id> -> <to_id>

The Drill-Down Mechanism

The power of IBIS is that you can attach a Question to any node type:

  • Question a Question: "Shouldn't we rather discuss X?"

  • Question an Answer: "What would we need to implement this?"

  • Question a Pro: "Is this advantage really significant?"

  • Question a Con: "Can we mitigate this disadvantage?"

Each sub-question starts its own Answer/Pro/Con branch, allowing unlimited depth.

Complete Example

vgraph techChoice: IBIS "Which database should we use?" {
    node q1: Question "Which database should we use?"

    node a1: Answer "PostgreSQL"
    node a2: Answer "MongoDB"

    edge q1 -> a1
    edge q1 -> a2

    node pro1: Pro "ACID compliance"
    node pro2: Pro "Mature ecosystem"
    node con1: Con "Schema migrations can be complex"

    edge a1 -> pro1
    edge a1 -> pro2
    edge a1 -> con1

    node pro3: Pro "Flexible schema"
    node con2: Con "Weaker transaction support"

    edge a2 -> pro3
    edge a2 -> con2

    node q2: Question "How to handle schema migrations?"
    edge con1 -> q2

    node a3: Answer "Use Flyway or Liquibase"
    edge q2 -> a3

    node pro4: Pro "Industry-standard tooling"
    edge a3 -> pro4
}

Rules

  1. ALWAYS start with a root Question — it frames the entire diagram

  2. Follow the structure: Question -> Answer -> Pro/Con

  3. Use Questions to drill down — attach them to any node that needs exploration

  4. Keep labels concise — Questions as questions, Answers as noun phrases, Pros/Cons as short statements

  5. Use meaningful IDs (q1, mainIdea, costCon — not n1, n2, n3)

  6. Each Answer should have at least one Pro or Con to be useful

  7. Avoid orphan nodes — every node must connect to the tree

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
vglYesValid VGL code using the IBIS notation. Must start with: vgraph <id>: IBIS "<title>" { ... }

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses important constraints: edge types are inferred from node types, only certain connections are valid, a root Question is required, and orphan nodes should be avoided. It does not mention error handling for invalid VGL, but overall behavior is well specified.

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 description is long, but the length is warranted because it documents a custom mini-language. It is well structured with headings, syntax blocks, an example, and rules. Some redundancy exists between the intro and drill-down sections, but the organization earns the length.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is unusually complete. It covers how to structure the input, valid nodes and edges, drill-down behavior, a full example, and best-practice rules. An agent has everything needed to construct a valid call.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Although the schema already describes the vgl parameter at 100% coverage, the description adds substantial meaning: full VGL syntax, node types, edge rules, a complete example, and construction rules. This goes far beyond the schema and makes the expected input concrete.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Create a IBIS diagram as PNG image.' It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings by centering on the IBIS notation and VGL input, not generic diagrams. The scope is immediately understandable.

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 gives clear context for when IBIS is appropriate: 'any decision, discussion, or thought process.' It does not explicitly exclude alternatives like concept maps or timelines, but the IBIS-specific guidance makes the intended use apparent.

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

All vgraph-mcp 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