studio
Server Details
Design & price modular raised garden beds and walls: exact bill of materials, EUR price + checkout.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4.4/5 across 4 of 4 tools scored.
Each tool has a distinct purpose: listing templates, catalog components, pricing, and building a cart. No overlap, and descriptions clearly differentiate their roles.
All tools start with 'studio_' and use underscores, but the patterns vary: verb_noun (catalog_bricks), verb_to_noun (bom_to_cart), and noun_noun (pricing_quote, templates_list). Minor inconsistency.
With 4 tools, the set is well-scoped for the domain of designing and purchasing modular garden beds. No unnecessary tools, and the count is reasonable.
The tools cover the full workflow: explore templates, get component prices, compute total price, and create a checkout cart. No evident gaps for the intended use case.
Available Tools
4 toolsstudio_bom_to_cartAdd a GridGarden design to a Shopify cart (checkout link)ADestructiveInspect
Build a ready-to-pay Shopify cart for a GridGarden Brick Premium raised bed (rectangle / L / U) or wall from millimetre dimensions, and return the checkout URL. Computes the exact bill of materials, maps it to the live Brick Premium product variants, and creates an ANONYMOUS cart — no account, login, or payment occurs; the user reviews and pays on gridgarden.eu. Returns checkout_url, total EUR, and the line items.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| shape | Yes | Design type and the dimension fields it needs (all in mm, auto-snapped to the 60mm build grid): rectangle → length + width; lshape → length1 + width1 + length2 + width2; ushape → topLength + topWidth + arm1Length + arm1Width + arm2Length + arm2Width; wall → wallLength. Layers: raised beds 2–13, walls 1–25. Call studio_templates_list for ready example dimensions. | |
| width | No | Rectangle: outer width in mm. | |
| layers | Yes | Number of brick layers. Raised beds 2-13, walls 1-25 (1 = a single 60mm top-cap course). Each layer ≈120mm tall (top layer +60mm). | |
| length | No | Rectangle: outer length in mm. | |
| width1 | No | L-shape: first leg width in mm. | |
| width2 | No | L-shape: second leg width in mm. | |
| length1 | No | L-shape: first leg length in mm. | |
| length2 | No | L-shape: second leg length in mm. | |
| topWidth | No | U-shape: back (top) width in mm. | |
| arm1Width | No | U-shape: arm 1 width in mm. | |
| arm2Width | No | U-shape: arm 2 width in mm. | |
| topLength | No | U-shape: back (top) length in mm. | |
| arm1Length | No | U-shape: arm 1 length in mm. | |
| arm2Length | No | U-shape: arm 2 length in mm. | |
| utm_source | No | Attribution source recorded on the Shopify cart (UTM). Defaults to "mcp". | |
| wallLength | No | Wall: single straight segment length in mm. |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| cart_id | Yes | |
| snapped | No | |
| summary | Yes | |
| currency | Yes | |
| total_eur | Yes | |
| editor_url | Yes | |
| line_items | Yes | |
| checkout_url | Yes | |
| total_quantity | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations (non-readOnly, destructive) indicate mutation; description adds context: computes BOM, maps to variants, creates anonymous cart, no account/login/payment, auto-snaps dimensions to 60mm grid. This explains key behaviors beyond what annotations provide.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Three sentences, highly informative, front-loaded with purpose. No unnecessary words or repetition. Efficient and clear.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Covers main purpose, return values (checkout_url, total EUR, line items), and key behaviors (anonymous cart). Output schema exists for details. Could add error handling info, but current completeness is high given complexity.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%; description adds value by explaining shape-dependent dimension fields, snapping, and layer height (≈120mm per layer). Enhances understanding of how parameters interact.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description clearly states verb (build/create), resource (Shopify cart), and scope (from dimensions to checkout URL). Distinguishes from siblings by focusing on cart creation, while siblings studio_catalog_bricks, studio_pricing_quote, studio_templates_list handle catalog, pricing, and templates respectively.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Describes when to use: when user wants a ready-to-pay cart. Mentions no login/payment, so user knows it's a pre-payment step. References studio_templates_list for example dimensions, hinting at alternative. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or comparison with studio_pricing_quote.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
studio_catalog_bricksGridGarden Brick Premium catalog + live pricesARead-onlyInspect
List the GridGarden Brick Premium modular components — middle and TOP planks in XS–XL sizes (plus a 1200mm XXL TOP) and the connector pin — with live EUR unit prices and availability from Shopify. Brick Premium only; no other materials are sold. Read-only.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| catalog | Yes | |
| summary | Yes | |
| currency | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already set readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. Description adds 'Read-only' and specifies data source (Shopify) and live pricing, enhancing transparency beyond annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, every word adds value. Front-loaded with main action, concise and well-structured.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given zero parameters, good annotations, and a simple listing task, the description is fully complete. It covers what is listed, units, data source, and limitations.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
No parameters exist (schema is empty), so baseline is 4. Description doesn't need to add parameter info, and its clarity about the output compensates.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description clearly states the tool lists GridGarden Brick Premium modular components with live EUR prices and availability. It specifies the exact components (planks and connector pin) and explicitly limits to Brick Premium, distinguishing it from sibling tools.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies the tool is for listing Brick Premium components and notes that no other materials are sold, providing a clear scope. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, but the context is sufficient.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
studio_pricing_quoteGridGarden raised-bed / wall price quoteARead-onlyInspect
Compute the exact bill of materials (panels + connector pins) and total EUR price for a GridGarden modular Brick Premium raised bed (rectangle / L / U) or freestanding wall, from dimensions in millimetres. Pricing is authoritative — same engine as the Studio configurator.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| shape | Yes | Design type and the dimension fields it needs (all in mm, auto-snapped to the 60mm build grid): rectangle → length + width; lshape → length1 + width1 + length2 + width2; ushape → topLength + topWidth + arm1Length + arm1Width + arm2Length + arm2Width; wall → wallLength. Layers: raised beds 2–13, walls 1–25. Call studio_templates_list for ready example dimensions. | |
| width | No | Rectangle: outer width in mm. | |
| layers | Yes | Number of brick layers. Raised beds 2-13, walls 1-25 (1 = a single 60mm top-cap course). Each layer ≈120mm tall (top layer +60mm). | |
| length | No | Rectangle: outer length in mm. | |
| width1 | No | L-shape: first leg width in mm. | |
| width2 | No | L-shape: second leg width in mm. | |
| length1 | No | L-shape: first leg length in mm. | |
| length2 | No | L-shape: second leg length in mm. | |
| topWidth | No | U-shape: back (top) width in mm. | |
| arm1Width | No | U-shape: arm 1 width in mm. | |
| arm2Width | No | U-shape: arm 2 width in mm. | |
| topLength | No | U-shape: back (top) length in mm. | |
| arm1Length | No | U-shape: arm 1 length in mm. | |
| arm2Length | No | U-shape: arm 2 length in mm. | |
| wallLength | No | Wall: single straight segment length in mm. |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| bom | Yes | |
| shape | Yes | |
| layers | Yes | |
| snapped | No | |
| summary | Yes | |
| currency | Yes | |
| total_eur | Yes | |
| editor_url | Yes | |
| shopify_items | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds that pricing is authoritative and uses the same engine as the Studio configurator, reinforcing that it is a safe, reliable read operation. No contradictions. The description provides useful behavioral context beyond annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is extremely concise: two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and no wasted words. Every sentence adds value.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the complexity (15 parameters, 100% schema coverage, output schema exists), the description adequately explains the tool's purpose and authority. It could mention grid snapping or currency, but it is largely complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% with individual parameter descriptions. The description adds high-level context about shape types and layer ranges but does not significantly enhance parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool computes a bill of materials and total EUR price for specific shapes (raised bed, wall) using dimensions. It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on pricing and referencing the studio_templates_list for example dimensions.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description indicates when to use this tool (for accurate pricing) and points to studio_templates_list for ready dimensions. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools for other purposes like catalog browsing or cart actions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
studio_templates_listGridGarden Studio templatesARead-onlyInspect
List the design shapes GridGarden Studio supports, with the dimension parameters each one needs.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| templates | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds value beyond annotations by specifying that the output includes 'dimension parameters each one needs', providing context about the return content. No contradictions or missing critical behaviors.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's purpose. Every word serves a clear function with no wasted text.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool's simplicity (zero parameters, read-only, and an output schema), the description fully covers the necessary context. It explains what the tool lists and what the output contains. No additional information is required for correct invocation.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool has zero parameters, so baseline score 4 applies. The description does not need to explain parameters, and it briefly references the dimension parameters in the output, which indirectly relates to usage.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses the specific verb 'List' and resource 'design shapes', clearly stating the tool's function. It distinguishes from sibling tools (studio_bom_to_cart, studio_catalog_bricks, studio_pricing_quote) by focusing on shapes and their dimension parameters, which are not related to BOM, bricks, or pricing.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
While the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, the context is clear: this tool lists supported design shapes and their parameters, whereas siblings handle other operations. The sibling names and description provide implicit differentiation, but explicit guidance is absent.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!