Duvo MCP

Create Clarity Landscape Node

createClarityLandscapeNode

Create an area folder in the process tree. An active area (the default) requires organization admin+; a "proposal" area may be added by any organization member.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes
`orgId`	Yes
`parentId`	No
`ownerLabel`	No
`description`	No	One or two sentences saying what family of work this area groups. Persisted as the area's summary.
`creationMode`	No	Use "proposal" to add an area for review instead of asserting it exists. A proposal is idempotent: an equivalent live area under the same parent is returned untouched rather than duplicated. Defaults to "active" — except in a landscape-onboarding chat, which may only propose, and so defaults to "proposal".

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses permission requirements (admin+ for active, any member for proposal) and the idempotent behavior of proposal mode, which goes beyond the sparse annotations (all false). It clarifies that active creation is not idempotent, providing valuable behavioral context for an agent.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose and then permission context. No redundant or filler information is present, making it highly efficient.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description covers the core purpose and permission nuances, but omits details about parameters like parentId and ownerLabel, and doesn't mention return values (no output schema). For a 6-parameter creation tool, this is incomplete, though it does address key semantic distinctions.

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

Parameters2/5

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

With only 33% schema coverage, the description should compensate for parameter explanations, but it only sheds light on creationMode (via permissions and idempotency). It does not clarify orgId, name, parentId, ownerLabel, or description, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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 states 'Create an area folder in the process tree' with a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like createClarityFolder or createClarityProcess. It also explains the active/proposal modes, which further clarifies the tool's purpose.

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 provides usage context by explaining permission requirements for active vs proposal modes, guiding when each should be used. It does not explicitly compare to alternative tools, but the clear verb and resource make the primary use obvious, and the mode-specific guidance is a strong point.

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

All Duvo MCP 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

B3.1/5.0

Disambiguation2/5

Despite detailed descriptions, many tool names are highly ambiguous, with multiple tools covering the same conceptual actions (e.g., acceptClarityCaptureSuggestion vs. acceptClarityTeamAssignmentSuggestion, or the many deleteClarity*Interview tools). The set is so large that distinguishing between, say, listClarityFolders, listClarityProcesses, and listClarityProcessSummaries requires reading deep into descriptions, reducing agent selection accuracy.

Naming Consistency4/5

The naming convention is predominantly verb_noun (e.g., createClarityProcess, listAgents, deleteQueue), and is remarkably consistent across the 316 tools. There are only minor deviations, such as 'fileSuggestedClarityProcesses' (verb + adjective noun) and 'bulkUpdateCasePriority' (where 'bulk' could be seen as a prefix), but overall the pattern holds strongly.

Tool Count1/5

With 316 tools, this server is extremely oversized for any single agent to manage effectively. The massive number of tools suggests poor modularization—many of these tools likely belong in separate, smaller servers focused on specific domains (e.g., Clarity, Pulse, Agent management). The cognitive load for an agent to choose from 316 options is very high, leading to frequent misselection.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers an extraordinarily wide range of operations across the Duvo platform: agents, runs, cases, queues, Clarity processes, skills, integrations, notifications, teams, and more. Most resource types have full CRUD and lifecycle management. Notable minor gaps exist (e.g., no tools for managing specific notification batch severities dynamically, and some interview management is missing batch operations), but for the platform's scope, coverage is impressively thorough.

Resources

Need Help?