Skip to main content
Glama

Diagrams MCP

by io.github.mskry

find_equivalent

Read-onlyIdempotent

Find cross-provider equivalents for a diagram node by infrastructure role.

Given a node name (e.g. 'EC2', 'Lambda', 'ComputeEngine'), returns the infrastructure role category it belongs to and the equivalent nodes from other providers.

If a node name is ambiguous, use list_categories to see all mapped roles and pick a provider-specific node name.

Args: node: Node class name to look up (case-insensitive, e.g. 'EC2', 'lambda'). target_provider: Optional provider to filter equivalents to (e.g. 'gcp', 'azure', 'aws'). If omitted, all equivalents across all other providers are returned.

Returns: A dict with keys: category (str): Infrastructure role category name. description (str): Human-readable description of the category. source (dict): The matched node with keys node, provider, service, import. equivalents (list[dict]): Equivalent nodes, each with keys node, provider, service, import.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nodeYes
target_providerNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds valuable behavioral context: case-insensitive matching, default behavior when target_provider is omitted, and the exact structure of the returned dictionary. It does not contradict 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-organized with clear sections (purpose, ambiguity note, Args, Returns). Every sentence adds useful information without redundancy. It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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?

Despite the tool having an output schema, the description provides a thorough explanation of inputs, outputs, and edge cases. It covers all necessary context for an agent to invoke the tool correctly, including optional filtering and return structure.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining the 'node' parameter with examples and case-insensitivity, and the 'target_provider' parameter with valid values and default behavior. This adds meaning well beyond the raw schema.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Find cross-provider equivalents for a diagram node by infrastructure role.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and it distinguishes itself from the sibling list_categories by providing equivalents rather than just categories.

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?

The description gives explicit usage guidance: it explains when to use the tool (to get equivalents) and provides an alternative when names are ambiguous ('use list_categories to see all mapped roles and pick a provider-specific node name'). It also clarifies the optional target_provider filter.

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

All Diagrams MCP 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

A4.6/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool serves a distinct purpose: browsing (list_providers, list_services, list_nodes, search_nodes), equivalence lookup (find_equivalent, list_categories), and rendering in three different syntaxes (render_diagram, render_mermaid, render_plantuml). No two tools overlap in function, and descriptions clearly differentiate when to use each.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with lowercase snake_case: list_* for browsing, render_* for output generation, find_equivalent, and search_nodes. The pattern is predictable and aids agent understanding.

Tool Count5/5

With 9 tools, the server is well-scoped: 4 browsing tools, 2 equivalence tools, and 3 rendering tools cover the diagram creation workflow without bloat. Each tool earns its place.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface supports the full workflow: discover providers/services/nodes, search for equivalent roles, and render diagrams in Python, Mermaid, or PlantUML. No obvious gaps exist for the stated purpose.

Resources