Skip to main content
Glama

duplicate_view

Duplicate an Airtable view including filters, sorts, and field visibility to reuse full configuration.

Instructions

Duplicate an existing view with all its configuration (filters, sorts, field visibility, etc).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
appIdYesThe Airtable base/application ID
tableIdYesThe table ID the view belongs to
sourceViewIdYesThe view ID to duplicate (e.g. "viwXXX")
newNameYesName for the duplicated view
debugNoWhen true, include raw Airtable response in output for diagnostics

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that executes the duplicate_view tool logic. Calls client.duplicateView() and returns the result.
    async duplicate_view({ appId, tableId, sourceViewId, newName, debug }) {
      const result = await client.duplicateView(appId, tableId, sourceViewId, newName);
      return ok(
        { duplicated: true, viewId: result.viewId, name: newName, sourceViewId },
        result,
        debug,
      );
    },
  • The tool definition and inputSchema for duplicate_view, specifying required parameters: appId, tableId, sourceViewId, newName.
    {
      name: 'duplicate_view',
      description: 'Duplicate an existing view with all its configuration (filters, sorts, field visibility, etc).',
      annotations: { readOnlyHint: false, destructiveHint: false, idempotentHint: false, openWorldHint: false },
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          appId: { type: 'string', description: 'The Airtable base/application ID' },
          tableId: { type: 'string', description: 'The table ID the view belongs to' },
          sourceViewId: { type: 'string', description: 'The view ID to duplicate (e.g. "viwXXX")' },
          newName: { type: 'string', description: 'Name for the duplicated view' },
          debug: debugProp,
        },
        required: ['appId', 'tableId', 'sourceViewId', 'newName'],
      },
    },
  • The AirtableClient.duplicateView() method that makes the actual API call to /v0.3/view/{viewId}/create with copyMode: 'duplicate'.
    async duplicateView(appId, tableId, sourceViewId, newName) {
      assertAirtableId(appId, 'appId');
      assertAirtableId(tableId, 'tableId');
      assertAirtableId(sourceViewId, 'sourceViewId');
      const viewId = 'viw' + this._genRandomId();
      const url = `https://airtable.com/v0.3/view/${viewId}/create`;
    
      const payload = {
        tableId,
        name: newName,
        type: 'grid', // type is inherited from source when duplicating
        copyFromViewId: sourceViewId,
        copyMode: 'duplicate',
        personalForUserId: null,
        lock: null,
      };
    
      const res = await this.auth.postForm(url, this._mutationParams(payload, appId), appId);
    
      if (!res.ok) {
        const errBody = await res.text().catch(() => '');
        throw new Error(`duplicateView failed (${res.status}): ${errBody}`);
      }
    
      this.cache.invalidate(appId);
      const data = await res.json().catch(() => ({}));
      return { viewId, ...data };
    }
  • Tool category registration mapping duplicate_view to 'view-write' category in the tool configuration system.
    duplicate_view:         'view-write',
  • Mirror registration of duplicate_view in the VS Code extension's tool profile (kept in sync with tool-config.js).
    duplicate_view:            'view-write',
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations are all false, providing no behavioral hints. The description states it duplicates with configuration but fails to disclose key behaviors: whether it creates in the same table, whether it is idempotent (it is not), or any side effects (e.g., overwriting). The agent is left guessing about the operation's safety and output.

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 a single concise sentence that immediately conveys the core action and scope. Every word earns its place, and the structure is optimal for quick comprehension.

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?

The tool is relatively simple with 5 parameters and no output schema. The description covers the basic intent but misses important context: what the tool returns (e.g., the new view ID), error conditions (e.g., duplicate name, missing source), and any prerequisites. An agent may lack sufficient information to choose and use the tool confidently.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100%, so the schema documents all parameters. The description adds minimal value by mentioning 'filters, sorts, field visibility' to clarify what 'configuration' means, but it does not explain the 'debug' parameter or provide formatting guidance for IDs. The description is adequate but not compensatory beyond the schema.

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 uses the specific verb 'Duplicate' and identifies the resource as 'existing view', clearly distinguishing it from siblings like 'create_view' (new from scratch) and 'rename_view'. It also elaborates on the scope ('all its configuration'), leaving no ambiguity about the action.

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?

The description implies its usage context (creating a copy of a view), but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it vs alternatives (e.g., 'create_view' when building from scratch) or any prerequisites or limitations (e.g., view existence, name uniqueness). The agent must infer usage from the tool name.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Automations-Project/VSCode-Airtable-Formula'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server