Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

ChartAnt

by net.chartant
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Generate Funnel Chart

generate_funnel_chart
Read-onlyIdempotent

Draw a funnel chart of how many remain at each stage of a process (visitors → sign-ups → purchases), widest first. Data [{category, value}] in stage order. 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_funnel_chart"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesData for funnel chart, such as, [{ category: '浏览网站', value: 50000 }, { category: '放入购物车', value: 35000 }, { category: '生成订单', value: 25000 }, { category: '支付订单', value: 15000 }, { category: '完成交易', value: 8000 }].
styleNoStyle configuration for the chart with a JSON object, optional.
themeNoSet the theme for the chart, optional, default is 'default'.default
titleNoSet the title of chart.
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
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), so the description's main added value is the return payload: hosted PNG link, share page, alt text, and editable PowerPoint/Excel links. That is genuinely useful, but it omits that the call persists/hosts artifacts (relevant for a tool that creates files) and says nothing about latency or link lifetime.

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 tight sentences: purpose and ordering first, return shape second. No filler, no restating of the title, and the most important constraint (data in stage order) is front-loaded.

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 a 7-parameter tool with nested style objects and no output schema, the description covers the two things an agent most needs: the shape/ordering of `data` and what comes back. Minor gaps (brandTheme usage nuance, styling not described) are fully documented in the schema, so completeness is adequate rather than exhaustive.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning the schema does not: data must be supplied in stage order and rendered widest-first, which constrains how the agent should order the array. Style, theme, size and brandTheme are left entirely to the schema, which is acceptable given full coverage.

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 opens with a specific verb plus resource ('Draw a funnel chart') and immediately scopes it to stage-based processes with decreasing counts, which clearly separates it from the bar/column/pie siblings. An agent can pick this tool without diffing 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?

It communicates the appropriate situation well: 'how many remain at each stage of a process (visitors → sign-ups → purchases), widest first' tells the agent to use this for stage/conversion data rather than general categorical data. It stops short of naming an alternative (e.g. bar chart for non-sequential data) or stating exclusions, so it is clear context without explicit routing.

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