DB Planner

Create document

create_document

Create a document in a project. A project holds database schemas (DBML or SQL) and diagrams (Mermaid) side by side, and both render onto the same board.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`kind`	No	"dbml" for a database schema (the default), "mermaid" for a diagram. Name the file to match: .dbml for a schema, .mmd for a diagram.
`name`	Yes	File name, e.g. schema.dbml or flow.mmd.
`order`	No	Sort position in the project's document list; omit to append.
`content`	No	Initial document text; omit for the kind's starter content.
`projectId`	Yes	Project id (uuid).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`kind`	Yes
`name`	Yes
`order`	No
`content`	Yes

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations provide only readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, which is consistent but not informative. The description adds no behavioral details such as side effects, permission requirements, duplicate-name behavior, or what happens on the board. For a creation tool, this leaves important operational behavior undisclosed.

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 concise sentences with the action front-loaded. The second sentence provides relevant context about what a project contains, which helps an agent understand the domain without adding fluff.

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?

The full parameter schema, output schema, and project-context sentence give enough information for a straightforward create call. It could be more thorough about edge cases or permissions, but for this tool's complexity the description is adequately complete.

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?

All five parameters are already documented in the schema with 100%% coverage, including kind values and naming conventions. The description does not need to re-explain parameters, and adds only contextual information about project content rather than parameter-level semantics.

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?

The description clearly states the action ('Create') and the resource ('a document in a project'), and adds useful context that projects contain database schemas and diagrams. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings like update_document or create_project, but the verb and object make the tool's role unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies when to use the tool: to add a schema or diagram document to a project. However, it does not provide explicit guidance about when to choose this over update_document, use_template, or other sibling tools. The usage is clear enough from context but not fully explicit.

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

All DB Planner 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

A3.7/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Every tool targets a distinct resource/action: board retrieval is split into JSON vs image with explicit cross-references, and drawing tools are separated from the generic update_board. Look-alikes like list_documents vs list_diagrams and publish_listing vs use_template are differentiated clearly.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a verb_noun pattern: create_project, list_documents, update_board, upsert_org_member. A few noun-only names like my_listings, project_file_counts and template_categories break the pattern, so naming is consistent but not uniform.

Tool Count2/5

40 tools is well beyond the 25+ threshold for a single server, even though the domains are clustered into org/project/document/board/template areas. The large surface will make tool selection and onboarding heavier for an agent than necessary.

Completeness3/5

Core lifecycle coverage for org/project/document/board/template is mostly present, and update_board serves as a flexible escape hatch. However, the board API reads rectangle/diamond/ellipse/free-text drawings and groups/links but only offers explicit create/erase for strokes and arrows; paid template purchase/access is also left unclear.

Resources

Need Help?