EaseWeb

Leave a note

add_comment

Leave a note on any presentation you can see -- on a slide ("slide_id") or on the whole presentation -- or answer a thread ("reply_to"). Notes and replies are visible to everyone who can view the presentation.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`slug`	Yes	The presentation's slug (its address: /movie/<slug>/).
`text`	Yes	The note (plain text, up to 4000 characters).
`reply_to`	No	The id of a note to answer.
`slide_id`	No	The id of a slide (stable, the "id" of the slide in the presentation). Its number (position) changes when slides are reordered.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes
`text`	Yes
`agent`	No	Name of the AI agent that wrote it, if any.
`author`	No
`resolved`	No
`slide_id`	No	null: a note on the whole presentation.
`created_at`	No	ISO 8601 date and time.
`slide_number`	No
`slide_deleted`	No	The slide of the note was deleted (the history has it).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 19, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / slide_deleted

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The slide of the note was deleted (the history has it).",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedSep 28, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / text / maxLength
```
Added value: +4000
```

Changed1 schema field changedSep 28, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "agent": {
+      "description": "Name of the AI agent that wrote it, if any.",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "author": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "created_at": {
+      "description": "ISO 8601 date and time.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "id": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "resolved": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "slide_id": {
+      "description": "null: a note on the whole presentation.",
+      "type": [
+        "integer",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "slide_number": {
+      "type": [
+        "integer",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "text": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "id",
+    "text"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the mutation risk profile is covered structurally. The description adds a consequence the annotations cannot: notes and replies are visible to every viewer of the presentation, which is exactly the kind of side-effect disclosure that matters for a write tool. It does not mention that repeated calls create duplicate notes (non-idempotent) or what failures look like.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, with the placement options and the visibility caveat following immediately. No filler or restatement of the title.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and annotations plus full schema coverage carry the structural load. The description supplies the access requirement and audience visibility. The only gap is silence on duplicate-creation behavior for a non-idempotent write tool.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the per-parameter baseline is 3. The description goes beyond the schema by explaining the interaction between parameters — omitting slide_id targets the whole presentation, and reply_to answers an existing thread rather than starting a new note — which the individual field descriptions do not make explicit together.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Leave a note on any presentation") and enumerates the three placement modes: slide-level, presentation-level, and thread reply. This cleanly separates it from delete_comment, list_comments, and resolve_comment. It stops short of naming a sibling explicitly, so a 4 rather than a 5.

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 tells the agent which parameter combination selects which behavior (slide_id for a slide note, neither for a presentation-wide note, reply_to to answer a thread), which is genuine when-to-use guidance. It also establishes the access precondition ("any presentation you can see"). No explicit when-not-to-use or error-condition guidance.

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

All EaseWeb tools Inspect

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

Need Help?