Skip to main content
Glama

Set an entry’s gallery

set_entry_gallery
Destructive

Set the images an entry shows after its lead image: the whole ordered list of media ids (from media_catalog or get_entry), replacing the gallery; [] empties it. At most 5 (6 images in all with the lead), each once, never the lead itself (set_entry_image sets that). An image taken off loses its link; links sets or clears the link of an image in the list (needs Link images). A live edit, audited. Dry run by default. To ask a reviewer instead, use propose_entry_change.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
entryYesThe entry: its VHID (11 digits), its short name (as in verifiedhandles.org/<short>), or its Wikidata QID (Q42).
linksNomedia id → the address that image links to on the entry page instead of the full-screen viewer; "" clears it. Images not named keep theirs. Needs Link images.
dry_runNotrue (the default): write nothing — show the change and the exact request it would send. false: make the change.
summaryNoWhy you made this edit, in a few plain words; shown in the entry’s public history. At most 200 characters. Never an internal tracking ID (a backlog or ticket number); a VHID is fine.
media_idsYes
idempotency_keyNoOptional: a key you choose (1–255 printable ASCII, e.g. a UUID), sent as the write’s Idempotency-Key. Calling again with the same key and the same change within 24 hours answers the first call’s result (replayed: true) and writes nothing; the same key with another change is refused (422).
base_revision_idNoThe revision you read (get_entry → editing.baseRevisionId). If the entry has changed since, the edit is refused as a conflict. Left out, the current revision is used.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
noteNoA dry run: what to do next to make the change, in words.
resultNoA real run: the route’s own answer, where the tool adds facts of its own beside it.
confirmNoA dry run of a change that needs it: the exact target to send back as `confirm` with dry_run: false.
dry_runNotrue: a dry run, which wrote nothing. Absent from a real run.
replayedNoA real run with an idempotency_key already used for this change: the first call’s answer, given back; nothing was written now.
would_sendNoA dry run: the exact request the real run would send (`method`, `path`, any `headers` such as an Idempotency-Key, and its `body`, `form` or `query`), or the requests, in order.
may_edit_liveNoA dry run of a live edit: whether this key’s account may edit this entry live.
refused_becauseNoA dry run the real run would be refused for: why, in words.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark this as a destructive, non-read-only write. The description adds important behavior beyond annotations: it is a live audited edit, dry-run by default, images removed lose their links, links require the Link images permission, and the gallery is limited to 5 images with no duplicates or lead image.

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 dense but front-loaded with the primary action and then packs constraints efficiently. Every sentence carries operational information, and there is no filler.

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 destructive, nested-object write tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential agent-facing context: purpose, replacement semantics, limits, permission needs, dry-run default, audit context, and the main alternative. Return values are appropriately left to the output schema.

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 description coverage is high at 86%, so the schema already carries much of the parameter documentation. The description still adds meaningful semantics for media_ids and links, including the business limit of 5 images despite the schema allowing 50, ordering, replacement behavior, and link clearing behavior.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: set the ordered gallery of images an entry shows after its lead image, replacing the whole list. It explicitly distinguishes itself from set_entry_image for the lead image and propose_entry_change for review-based edits, so the agent can identify exactly what this tool does.

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?

Provides clear routing: use propose_entry_change to ask a reviewer instead, and use set_entry_image for the lead image. It also explains the replacement semantics and that dry_run defaults to true, giving practical invocation context.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.