Skip to main content
Glama

Anima MCP Server

by io.github.AnimaApp
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Check Artifact Status

artifact-status
Read-only

Check the build status of an EXISTING artifact (from artifact-create). Read-only.

Generation is asynchronous, so this is how you find out it finished. Call it with { sessionId, wait: true } and it WAITS for you: the call returns as soon as status is 'ready' or 'failed', or after about 45 seconds still 'generating'. Then, you can call it again. This tool is meant to be called right after artifact-create, before replying to the user, and keep getting called until status is no longer 'generating'. ONLY when you want an instant snapshot, this tool can be called without wait (or false); the idea is to never spin on wait: false.

Requires sessionId — the id returned by artifact-create (or the last path segment of an artifact URL like https://app.agentgrid.io/artifacts/ or https://dev.animaapp.com/chat/).

Returns: { success, sessionId, status: 'generating' | 'ready' | 'failed', progress (0–100, while generating), name, artifactUrl (generating/ready only), playgroundUrl (app and knowledge artifacts only, generating/ready only), previewUrl (app, knowledge and markdown artifacts only, generating/ready only), error (when failed), nextStep (when a wait returned still generating) }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
waitNoWait for generation to finish instead of returning the current snapshot. The call returns as soon as status is "ready" or "failed", or after about 45 seconds still "generating" — in that case call again to keep waiting. Use wait: true after artifact-create so you can report the finished app; do NOT call this tool in a tight loop with wait: false.
sessionIdYesThe artifact session id to check status for (returned by artifact-create).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds critical behavioral context: asynchronous generation, timeout after 45 seconds, and the exact wait semantics. It also discloses the return structure with fields for different statuses, which is beyond the annotations.

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?

The description is well-structured and front-loaded: purpose first, then usage flow, then parameter specifics, then return details. Every sentence adds value, and it avoids redundancy with the schema. It is detailed but not bloated.

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?

The description fully equips an agent to use the tool correctly: what it does, when to call, how to wait, what the sessionId is, and what the return object contains. For a complex async tool, nothing needed is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters. However, the description adds crucial meaning: it explains that sessionId can derive from artifact-create or from a URL's last segment, and elaborates on the wait behavior (45-second timeout, recommended true, not to spin). This is far beyond the schema's basic definitions.

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?

States a specific verb ('Check') and resource ('build status of an EXISTING artifact'), explicitly ties it to artifact-create, and clarifies it is read-only. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like artifact-edit or artifact-delete.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives explicit instructions: call right after artifact-create, keep calling until status is no longer 'generating', and warns against tight loops with wait: false. It also explains when to use wait: true vs false, leaving no ambiguity for the agent.

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

All Anima MCP Server toolsInspect
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