Skip to main content
Glama

Banquish

Add a Panel

add_panel

Propose a Panel from candidate ids of an open page. Banquish confirms it on the page, which the first Panel from it takes over as its own. The page stays open to you for more Panels: its ids stay valid for expand, find, add_panel and update_panel, and each further Panel gets a fresh copy of the page, where Banquish replays your reveals and finds the parts again, which takes a few seconds (refused if they aren't found). It answers within about 45 s: a Panel whose page is still loading then gives its id with "loading"; a later Fit report or read_workspace shows it settled. reveal and screenshot need the page opened again once a Panel has taken it. Each id is one part: take the smallest part that answers. Several ids make one Composite Panel, for parts of the page that act on each other (a player and its transcript, a chart and its time picker): they show together in one tile and stay live together. exclude takes ids of candidates inside the chosen parts that the Panel leaves out (the site's buttons and menus, an ad, a reply box, the rest of a container whose text you want); any other id is refused with the reason. Mode is "item" (follow this specific thing, the default) or "spot" (whatever occupies this place). Placement is where its Tile goes on the Workspace's grid, as in arrange; without one it goes full width below the last Tile. A width below a Panel's minimum width is taken, and its Panel shows scaled down to as little as 85% of that minimum on the user's screen; below 85% of it, the whole Workspace shows as one column. With h, a Panel's Tile is that tall: a taller Panel scrolls inside it, and a shorter one shows centred in it, which the Fit report mentions. Returns the Fit report: at the user's window, which Tiles are scaled below their Panel's minimum width, scroll inside, fell back to crop, are broken or ambiguous, or leave their Tile's width unused, and any gaps between Tiles; and, not as an issue, which Panels are shorter than the h of their Tile, so show centred in it. A Tile whose page hasn't laid it out at its width yet (one not on screen, say) is settling: a later report says how it fits. While a settling Tile's minimum width isn't known, whether the Workspace shows as one column isn't either: oneColumn is left out, and the summary says so.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modeNoitem
pageYes
excludeNo
placementNo
workspaceYes
candidatesYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only mark this as a non-idempotent open-world write, but the description discloses the operational facts an agent actually needs: the ~45 s answer window, 'loading' status for still-loading pages, that the page stays open with ids still valid, that each further Panel gets a fresh copy where reveals are replayed and refused if not found, the 85% minimum-width and one-column fallbacks, and settling Tiles with oneColumn omitted.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

It is one dense wall of text of roughly 300 words with nested parentheticals, so it is poorly front-loaded; the reader must wade through Fit-report and settling details to get back to core input guidance. Nearly every sentence carries real information, which keeps it from scoring lower, but the structure needs breaking up and the return-value detail could be deferred.

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 complex nested-object mutation with no output schema, it explains both the mutation's effects (Panel creation, page copy, confirmation step) and the returned Fit report contents. Remaining gaps are minor: workspace and page identifiers are never characterized, and the 'Banquish confirms it' step is asserted without saying what the agent should do if confirmation fails.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description carries the full burden and mostly delivers: candidates (one id = one part), exclude (ids inside chosen parts that the Panel leaves out; other ids refused with a reason), mode (item = follow this specific thing vs spot = whatever occupies this place), and placement/h/w semantics including defaults and scaling. Only workspace and page are left essentially unexplained.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The opening sentence 'Propose a Panel from candidate ids of an open page' gives a specific verb (propose/add) and resource (Panel) scoped to an open page's candidates. It is distinguishable from update_panel and arrange only indirectly (placement 'as in arrange'), and the domain jargon 'Panel'/'Banquish' assumes prior context, so it falls short of a clean 5.

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?

Strong guidance on how to pick inputs: 'Each id is one part: take the smallest part that answers', use several ids for a Composite when parts act on each other, and use exclude for the site's chrome or an ad. It also gives an important prerequisite/state rule ('reveal and screenshot need the page opened again once a Panel has taken it'). It does not explicitly contrast itself with update_panel or explain when to add a new Panel vs modify an existing one.

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.