Skip to main content
Glama

mu

by mu.micro

Create apps

apps_create

Create an app — a small, self-contained HTML tool hosted here. Takes the HTML; apps_build writes it for you from a description

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
htmlYesThe app's HTML, inline CSS and JavaScript included, up to 256KB
iconNoAn SVG icon
nameYesApp name, e.g. "Pomodoro Timer"
slugNoURL-friendly id, e.g. pomodoro-timer. Derived from the name if omitted
tagsNoComma-separated tags
priceNoCredits charged per use, 0 for free, up to 1000
descriptionNoWhat the app does. Defaults to the name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed8 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / description / description
      Previous value: -"Short description of what the app does"New value: +"What the app does. Defaults to the name"
    • changedInput schema / properties / html / description
      Previous value: -"The app's HTML content (can include inline CSS and JavaScript, max 256KB)"New value: +"The app's HTML, inline CSS and JavaScript included, up to 256KB"
    • addedInput schema / properties / icon
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "An SVG icon",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Previous value: -"App name (e.g. Pomodoro Timer)"New value: +"App name, e.g. \"Pomodoro Timer\""
    • changedInput schema / properties / price / description
      Previous value: -"Credits charged per use (0 = free, max 1000)"New value: +"Credits charged per use, 0 for free, up to 1000"
    • changedInput schema / properties / slug / description
      Previous value: -"URL-friendly ID (e.g. pomodoro-timer)"New value: +"URL-friendly id, e.g. pomodoro-timer. Derived from the name if omitted"
    • changedInput schema / properties / tags / description
      Previous value: -"Comma-separated tags (optional)"New value: +"Comma-separated tags"
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "name",
-  "slug",
-  "description",
-  "html"
-]New value: +[
+  "name",
+  "html"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations contain only a title, so the description carries the full burden. It adds that apps are self-contained HTML tools and that the input is HTML, but does not disclose side effects, permissions, or the response format. For a create operation, this is adequate but not rich.

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 a single, well-constructed sentence that defines the tool, gives its purpose, and contrasts it with apps_build. Every clause earns its place, with no redundancy or extra fluff.

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?

Given sparse annotations and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and usage distinction effectively. It lacks details about permissions or return values, but the schema covers all parameters. For a straightforward create tool, this is largely 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 schema has 100% descriptive coverage for all 7 parameters, so the description does not need to repeat them. The mention of HTML aligns with the required html parameter but adds no new semantic detail beyond the schema. 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 clearly states the action ('Create an app') and provides a definition of the resource ('a small, self-contained HTML tool hosted here'). It explicitly contrasts with apps_build, which writes from a description, making the tool's purpose unmistakable and distinct from its primary sibling.

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 sentence 'Takes the HTML; apps_build writes it for you from a description' gives an explicit decision rule: use this tool when you have HTML, and use apps_build when you have a description. This directly addresses when to choose this tool over a key alternative, which is excellent guidance.

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

All mu 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

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Every tool is prefixed with a clear domain (e.g., apps_, blog_, transit_), and the suffix identifies a distinct action or resource. Overlapping tools like archive_search and news_search are explicitly differentiated in their descriptions.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tools consistently use a domain_prefix_suffix pattern, but the suffix is sometimes a verb (create, list, search) and sometimes a noun (inbox, status, address). This minor mixing prevents a perfect score but remains predictable and readable.

Tool Count2/5

With 113 tools, the count is far beyond the typical well-scoped range, even for a broad personal assistant. While each tool is distinct and serves a purpose, the sheer number is overwhelming and could be better organized into separate domain-specific servers.

Completeness4/5

Each domain has near-complete lifecycle coverage, including CRUD and search where relevant, with only minor gaps such as missing apps_delete or events_update. The wide range of covered domains itself demonstrates strong completeness for a general assistant.

Resources