agentView

Set Data Slot

set_data_slot

DestructiveIdempotent

Creates or updates a mutable JSON data slot (max 2 MB) that display HTML fetches via its readUrl — the live-data backbone for store templates. The slug is stable; reusing it updates in place. type 'value' stores JSON verbatim; 'aggregate' composes up to 32 sources ({slot:'name'} or one {prefixMatch:'agent-'}) within the same personal/group scope. Requires content scope. Returns slug, readUrl and size.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`slug`	Yes	Stable slug for the data slot. Must match ^[A-Za-z0-9_-]{8,64}$. Same slug on a later call updates the existing slot. Slug stays exactly as supplied; the public URL uses a separate server-generated PublicId so the slug itself is never sensitive.
`type`	No	Slot kind. 'value' (default) stores 'content' verbatim. 'aggregate' stores 'content' as a composite-slot definition. Immutable after creation.
`label`	No	Human-readable label (max 200 chars). Required when creating a new slot; optional on update.
`content`	Yes	JSON content to store. For value slots: any valid JSON value up to 2 MB. For aggregate slots: a definition object { sources: [{slot,as?} \| {prefixMatch}], onMissing?, onInvalidJson?, includeMeta?, staleAfterMs?, output? }.
`group_id`	No	Group/organization ID for shared group slots. Omit for personal slots.
`access_token`	No	Optional bearer token; prefer session_request_id.
`session_request_id`	No	Session handle from create_auth_session; pass it on every authenticated call.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`slug`	No
`type`	No
`label`	No
`groupId`	No
`readUrl`	No
`sizeBytes`	No
`updatedAt`	No

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already signal readOnly=false, idempotent=true, and destructive=true, and the description adds meaningful behavior beyond that: the 2 MB cap, in-place replacement via a stable slug, aggregate composition rules, scope constraint, and returned fields. This significantly enriches the annotation-only picture without contradicting it.

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?

Four dense sentences, each carrying distinct information: core behavior, mutation semantics, type semantics, and auth/return information. No filler or redundancy; the most critical facts are front-loaded.

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?

With an output schema present and full schema coverage for all 7 parameters, the description supplies the remaining operational context: size limit, update semantics, aggregation behavior, scope requirements, and return value highlights. An agent has enough to invoke this tool correctly and interpret its role among related data-slot tools.

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 the baseline is 3. The description does add high-level meaning by explaining the difference between 'value' and 'aggregate' contents and the 32-source composition rule, but it mostly reinforces what the parameter descriptions already state rather than introducing substantial new parameter semantics.

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: 'Creates or updates a mutable JSON data slot' and attaches a concrete purpose ('display HTML fetches via its readUrl'). It also distinguishes the two behavioral modes ('value' vs 'aggregate'), separating this tool from sibling list/get/delete data-slot tools without ambiguity.

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 makes the intended use explicit: this is 'the live-data backbone for store templates' and explains when each type is appropriate ('value' stores verbatim, 'aggregate' composes multiple sources). It does not name alternatives explicitly, but the context is clear enough to route an agent to this tool for mutable slot creation/updating rather than read/delete operations.

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

All agentView 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

A4/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools map cleanly to distinct resource-action pairs (displays, organizations, assets, data slots, store templates, auth). A few clusters like the get_store_template_* family and the auth/session tools could still confuse an agent, but their descriptions are explicit enough to separate them.

Naming Consistency4/5

The dominant pattern is consistent verb_noun snake_case (list_*, get_*, create_*, delete_*, send_*, set_*, manage_*). Deviations like fetch, search, authenticate, logout, and pair_by_code are understandable but break the otherwise uniform naming scheme.

Tool Count1/5

With 57 tools this server far exceeds the 50+ threshold, creating an extreme tool-set size for an MCP server. Even though the underlying platform is feature-rich, the sheer number of tools heavily taxes context and selection.

Completeness4/5

The surface covers display, organization, asset, data slot, store template, auth, API key, and licensing lifecycles in impressive depth. Minor gaps exist, such as no delete operation for display categories and no reboot/power control for displays.

Resources

Need Help?