Skip to main content
Glama

trident

by io.github.alexeibespalov

update_canvas_graphic

Idempotent

Repositions or resizes a background image (canvas graphic) in a live Trident document. Use open_document to get the canvas graphic ID and current dimensions — it appears as: image "" at (x, y) width:W height:H. The position at (x, y) is the TOP-LEFT corner. USE THIS BEFORE placing many geographically-positioned nodes: if the background map is small (e.g. width < 700), scale it up so nodes have room to breathe and do not overlap. Requires a valid editor access token.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tokenYesEditor access token for this document.
agentIdYesYOUR AI assistant name (e.g. "Claude.ai", "GitHub Copilot").
changesYesGeometry fields to update. Only provided fields are changed; all others are preserved.
userNameNoFirst name of the human you are assisting.
canvasGraphicIdYesID of the canvas graphic to update (from open_document output).
action_explanationNoOptional: brief explanation shown live to human collaborators (max 250 chars).

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false), the description adds key behavioral context: the coordinate system ('The position at (x, y) is the TOP-LEFT corner'), the live document effect, and the prerequisite of a valid token. This adds value without contradicting 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.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a compact block of three sentences with a logical flow: what it does, how to get prerequisites, and a concrete use case. It is slightly verbose but every sentence carries actionable information, and the important usage note is front-loaded.

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?

For a tool with a nested object and 6 params, the description covers the essential context: prerequisites, coordinate system, and intended use case. No output schema exists, but the description doesn't need to explain return values. It could mention error conditions or side effects, but overall it is sufficiently 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?

The input schema already provides 100% coverage with detailed parameter descriptions, including 'New top-left X position' etc. The description mostly repeats this information, though it reinforces the meaning of x/y via the top-left note and suggests scaling up width/height for usability. Since the schema does the heavy lifting, a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 starts with a specific verb and resource: 'Repositions or resizes a background image (canvas graphic) in a live Trident document.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_node or add_annotation, which target different elements.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: 'USE THIS BEFORE placing many geographically-positioned nodes...' and 'Use open_document to get the canvas graphic ID and current dimensions.' It also notes the token requirement. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or name alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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

All trident toolsInspect
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

A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: CRUD operations for nodes, containers, connections, and annotations are separated, and read-only/utility tools like open_document, get_document_summary, and explain are well-differentiated. No two tools have overlapping functionality.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g. add_node, delete_connection, get_document_summary). Even utility tools like open_document and validate_trident adhere to this pattern, making the set predictable and easy to navigate.

Tool Count4/5

With 22 tools, the server is slightly above the typical well-scoped range (3-15). Each tool serves a specific purpose, covering CRUD for diagram elements, multiple read operations, and collaboration features, but the count feels a bit heavy for a focused diagramming tool.

Completeness4/5

The tool set provides comprehensive CRUD for core elements (nodes, containers, connections, annotations), multiple read methods, guides, and collaboration aids. Minor gaps exist: no bulk operations, no tool to create or manage documents themselves, but the core editing workflow is well-covered.

Resources