Signature Maker

Signature practice sheet

signature_practice_sheet

Read-onlyIdempotent

Makes a practice sheet for a name with six boxes to trace and six to write freehand. Returns a PDF on A4 or US Letter and a picture of the page.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "signature_practice_sheet"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	The name to write, 1 to 60 characters.
`paper`	No	Paper size: a4 or letter. Default a4.
`style`	No	Hand style id: thread-tail, rising-arc, quill-paraph, airy-print, stacked-loops or marker-peaks. Default quill-paraph.
`nameFormat`	No	How the name is written: full, initial-last or monogram. Default full.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`pdf`	Yes
`item`	Yes
`kind`	Yes
`name`	Yes
`view`	Yes
`links`	Yes
`paper`	Yes
`style`	Yes
`otherPdf`	No
`nameFormat`	Yes
`displayName`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 11, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, non-destructive, idempotent and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description still earns credit by disclosing concrete output shape (a PDF on A4 or US Letter plus an image of the page) and the page structure, which the annotations cannot convey.

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 sentences, no filler, with the artifact and its layout front-loaded before the output-format sentence. Every clause carries information.

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?

An output schema exists, yet the description usefully previews the PDF and image deliverables. What remains unstated — e.g., handling of long names at the 60-character cap or whether style affects the freehand boxes — is minor for a low-risk generation tool with full annotation coverage.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with three enums fully documented, so the schema does the heavy lifting on name, paper, style and nameFormat. The description only restates the paper-size option and the box counts; it adds no meaning about how nameFormat or style interacts with the generated page.

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?

States a specific verb and artifact ('Makes a practice sheet for a name') plus the exact layout — six tracing boxes and six freehand boxes — so the agent can distinguish this from signature-generation siblings. It doesn't explicitly name a sibling as the alternative, which keeps it out of the 5 band.

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 use case (practicing a name) is strongly implied by the wording and the six-trace/six-freehand layout, but there is no explicit 'use this when' statement or mention of when to prefer handwritten_signature or signature_styles instead.

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

All Signature Maker tools Inspect

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.