Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

ChartAnt

by net.chartant
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Generate Fishbone Diagram

generate_fishbone_diagram
Read-onlyIdempotent

Draw a fishbone (Ishikawa, cause-and-effect) diagram: the problem as the head, groups of causes as the bones. Data {name: problem, children: [{name: cause group, children: [{name: cause}]}]}. For a plain hierarchy use generate_mind_map. 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_fishbone_diagram"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesData for fishbone diagram chart which is a hierarchical structure, such as, { name: 'main topic', children: [{ name: 'topic 1', children: [{ name: 'subtopic 1-1' }] }] }, and the maximum depth is 3.
styleNoStyle configuration for the chart with a JSON object, optional.
themeNoSet the theme for the chart, optional, default is 'default'.default
widthNoSet the width of chart, default is 600.
heightNoSet the height of chart, default is 400.
brandThemeNoName 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.

  1. First observed

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, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real value beyond that by disclosing the return payload — hosted PNG link, share page, alt text, and editable PowerPoint/Excel links — which the agent cannot learn from any structured field since there is no output schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three dense sentences, front-loaded with the diagram type and its conceptual mapping, then the data shape, then routing, then return values. Nothing is padding, though the inline data-shape literal partially repeats the schema and could be trimmed.

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?

For a generator tool with six parameters, nested objects, and no output schema, the description covers the essential gaps: what the diagram means semantically, how the hierarchy maps onto it, and exactly what the caller gets back. An agent has enough to select and invoke it correctly.

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 all six parameters (data, style, theme, width, height, brandTheme) are already documented in the schema, including enum meanings and defaults. The description restates the data nesting shape, which is helpful for quick parsing but duplicates what the schema already states; 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?

Names a specific verb and resource ('Draw a fishbone (Ishikawa, cause-and-effect) diagram') and immediately explains the semantic mapping ('problem as the head, groups of causes as the bones'). It also explicitly names the sibling it is not ('For a plain hierarchy use generate_mind_map'), so the agent can distinguish it without opening schemas.

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?

Provides an explicit routing rule: use generate_mind_map when the data is a plain hierarchy rather than a cause-and-effect structure. That covers the most likely confusion case, though it gives no other exclusions or prerequisites (e.g., when an org chart or flow diagram would be preferable).

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

All ChartAnt toolsInspect
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.

Resources