Skip to main content
Glama
Abramov-Front-end

RollDate MCP

by Abramov-Front-end
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

scaffold_example

Install RollDate Core or Events assets and generate a demo HTML file for a scenario to demonstrate date picker or event calendar integration.

Instructions

Install RollDate Core or Events assets (if needed) and write a demo HTML file for a scenario.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
productNoRollDate product. Default: core (date picker). Use events for event calendars.
scenarioYesScenario id from list_scenarios
targetDirNoAsset folder relative to cwd. Defaults per product.
outputFileNoHTML file path relative to cwd. Default: rolldate-example.html or rolldate-events-example.html

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changedv1.3.2
    • changedInput schema / properties / outputFile / description
      Previous value: -"HTML file path relative to cwd. Default: rolldate-example.html"New value: +"HTML file path relative to cwd. Default: rolldate-example.html or rolldate-events-example.html"
    • addedInput schema / properties / product
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "RollDate product. Default: core (date picker). Use events for event calendars.",
+  "enum": [
+    "core",
+    "events"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / scenario / description
      Previous value: -"Scenario id. One of: single, single-light, inline, range, range-two, multi, trigger, time-24, time-12, disabled, footer, highlight, range-presets"New value: +"Scenario id from list_scenarios"
    • removedInput schema / properties / scenario / enum
      Removed value: -[
-  "single",
-  "single-light",
-  "inline",
-  "range",
-  "range-two",
-  "multi",
-  "trigger",
-  "time-24",
-  "time-12",
-  "disabled",
-  "footer",
-  "highlight",
-  "range-presets"
-]
    • changedInput schema / properties / targetDir / description
      Previous value: -"Asset folder relative to cwd. Default: vendor/rolldate"New value: +"Asset folder relative to cwd. Defaults per product."
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.1.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / scenario / description
      Previous value: -"Scenario id. One of: single, single-light, inline, range, range-two, multi, trigger, time-24, time-12, disabled, footer"New value: +"Scenario id. One of: single, single-light, inline, range, range-two, multi, trigger, time-24, time-12, disabled, footer, highlight, range-presets"
    • changedInput schema / properties / scenario / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "single",
-  "single-light",
-  "inline",
-  "range",
-  "range-two",
-  "multi",
-  "trigger",
-  "time-24",
-  "time-12",
-  "disabled",
-  "footer"
-]New value: +[
+  "single",
+  "single-light",
+  "inline",
+  "range",
+  "range-two",
+  "multi",
+  "trigger",
+  "time-24",
+  "time-12",
+  "disabled",
+  "footer",
+  "highlight",
+  "range-presets"
+]
  3. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations, so the description carries the behavior burden. It discloses a real trait: it may install assets (a side effect) and writes a file to disk. But it doesn't state whether files are overwritten, whether installs are conditional/skipped, or auth/network requirements. Partial disclosure only.

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?

A single efficient sentence naming both the install and write actions. Front-loaded and waste-free, though the parenthetical '(if needed)' is slightly ambiguous.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

A 4-param tool with no annotations and no output schema. The description covers the main action but is silent on side effects (overwriting files, network installs), return values, and preconditions such as requiring a valid scenario id from list_scenarios. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents product, scenario, targetDir, and outputFile with defaults and enum values. The description adds nothing beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: installing RollDate Core/Events assets and writing a demo HTML file for a scenario. Clearly distinguishable from siblings like install_assets or get_snippet, which do one piece of this. The conditional '(if needed)' is slightly loose but the action is concrete.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Implied usage as a scaffolding/example generator, but no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives. It doesn't say to use install_assets instead when only assets are needed, nor when to prefer this over the get_* snippet tools.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools