Claix

Create Claix schema

claix.schemas.create

Create a Claix schema (POST /api/create-schema). Requires name, type (excel-json, json-excel, pdf-json, doc-json, img-json, txt-json) and schema_definition. Optional: is_agent_mode, agent_definition, resumen_agent, window_context, window_time.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	Human-readable schema name. Example: Facturas HTML.
`type`	Yes	Schema type matching an extraction endpoint. Example: txt-json, pdf-json.
`api_key`	No	API key secreta de Claix. Ejemplo: claix_sk_abc123.... Opcional si la conexión MCP envía x-api-key en cabecera HTTP (recomendado en Smithery/Cursor).
`window_time`	No	Required if window_context is true. Duration in minutes: 5, 10, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 180, 240, 360, 480, 720, 1440.
`is_agent_mode`	No	Set true to enable Agent mode. json-excel cannot use Agent mode.
`resumen_agent`	No	Optional Agent-mode instruction, max 500 characters.
`window_context`	No	If true, persist document markdown for later Q&A.
`agent_definition`	No	Required if is_agent_mode is true. Types: boolean, string, closed, integer. closed requires options[].
`schema_definition`	Yes	Output fields. Each key is a JSON property; each value is { type: "string"\|"integer"\|"number"\|"boolean", description: "..." }.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`data`	No	JSON payload from the Claix API (extracted records, schema list, or Excel export metadata).
`error`	No	Human-readable error message when success is false.
`success`	Yes	True when Claix returned a successful response. False when isError is set on the tool result.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate the operation is not read-only and not idempotent; the description adds the POST endpoint and creation intent. It does not disclose side effects, persistence behavior, or other operational details beyond what annotations and schema already show.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence communicates action, endpoint, required fields, accepted type values, and optional fields. There is no filler or redundancy.

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?

Given the rich input schema, output schema, and annotations, the description is sufficient for a straightforward create operation. It could mention how the schema relates to extraction/agent tools, but that is not necessary to invoke the endpoint correctly.

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 schema already documents all parameters. The description summarizes required and optional fields but does not add meaning beyond the schema's own per-parameter descriptions.

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 clearly identifies the action ('Create') and resource ('Claix schema') and includes the explicit HTTP endpoint. The create operation is distinct from sibling tools such as claix.schemas.delete and claix.schemas.list.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor are prerequisites or workflow context described. The parameter list is useful but does not help an agent decide when creating a schema is appropriate.

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

All Claix 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

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Every tool has a clearly distinct role: extract.* produces raw structured JSON, agent.* adds agent-mode reasoning, schemas.* manages schemas, and window_context.* handles persisted documents. Even the parallel extract/agent pairs for each format are disambiguated by the agent/group prefix and explicit descriptions about is_agent_mode.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tools follow a claix.<group>.<target> convention with lowercase snake_case, which is predictable and readable. The main inconsistency is action placement: extract.doc is verb-first while schemas.create is object-first, and convert.json_to_excel uses a noun phrase instead of a verb.

Tool Count4/5

At 17 tools, the set is slightly above the ideal 3-15 range, but each tool maps to a distinct endpoint or format variant. The parallel extract and agent families are justified by different processing modes, though they do make the surface feel a bit heavier than necessary.

Completeness4/5

The set covers schema lifecycle (create, list, delete), extraction for five major formats, agent-mode variants, document deletion, and window-context query/retrieval. Minor gaps include no schema update endpoint and no generic document listing/retrieval outside window_context.

Resources

Need Help?