ChartAnt

Generate Area Chart

generate_area_chart

Read-onlyIdempotent

Draw an area chart: a line chart with the area below filled, for totals or volumes over time (traffic, revenue). Data [{time, value, group?}]; set stack true to stack groups. For plain trends use generate_line_chart. Returns a hosted PNG link, a share page, alt text and editable PowerPoint/Excel links.

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": {
      "data": "<data>"
    },
    "name": "generate_area_chart"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes	Data for area chart, it should be an array of objects, each object contains a `time` field and a `value` field, such as, [{ time: '2015', value: 23 }, { time: '2016', value: 32 }], when stacking is needed for area, the data should contain a `group` field, such as, [{ time: '2015', value: 23, group: 'A' }, { time: '2015', value: 32, group: 'B' }].
`stack`	No	Whether stacking is enabled. When enabled, area charts require a 'group' field in the data.
`style`	No	Style configuration for the chart with a JSON object, optional.
`theme`	No	Set the theme for the chart, optional, default is 'default'.	default
`title`	No	Set the title of chart.
`width`	No	Set the width of chart, default is 600.
`height`	No	Set the height of chart, default is 400.
`animated`	No	true for an animated GIF (bars grow, lines draw, pies sweep open) instead of a still PNG; for email, slides and chat posts. The first frame is the finished chart.
`axisXTitle`	No	Set the x-axis title of chart.
`axisYTitle`	No	Set the y-axis title of chart.
`brandTheme`	No	Name of a brand theme saved on the user's account (their colours and footer), only when the user asks for their theme. Or "colorblind" for colours that people with colour-vision deficiency can tell apart (anyone can use it).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 15, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and closed-world, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context with no output schema present: it discloses the return payload — hosted PNG link, share page, alt text, and editable PowerPoint/Excel links — which an agent cannot learn from structured fields. It omits any mention of auth, quotas or generation latency.

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?

Three tight sentences: chart definition and use case first, data/stack hint second, sibling routing third, and return values last. Every sentence carries distinct information and nothing is repeated from the schema.

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 an 11-parameter tool with nested objects and no output schema, the description covers purpose, input shape, stacking, the closest alternative, and return artifacts, which is most of what an agent needs. Remaining gaps (styling options, brandTheme usage) are adequately documented in the schema, so nothing critical is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the data shape, stack flag, style object, theme, dimensions and brandTheme are already fully documented in the schema. The description's only parameter-level addition is 'set stack true to stack groups', which essentially restates the schema's stack description, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Draw an area chart') and immediately defines the form ('a line chart with the area below filled') plus the data domain ('totals or volumes over time (traffic, revenue)'). That definition is enough to distinguish it from generate_line_chart and the other chart siblings without opening any schema.

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?

It states a positive selection condition (totals/volumes over time) and names the alternative explicitly: 'For plain trends use generate_line_chart.' That is a clear when-to-use and one concrete when-not, though it does not address other plausible alternatives such as bar or stacked column charts.

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

All ChartAnt 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.