Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
preset-mcp

preset-mcp

by Evan-Kim2028
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

verify_dashboard_structure

Validate dashboard layout graph integrity and check chart reference health to ensure dashboards are structurally sound.

Instructions

Validate dashboard layout graph integrity and chart reference health.

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": {
      "dashboard_id": "<dashboard_id>"
    },
    "name": "verify_dashboard_structure"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dashboard_idYes
response_modeNostandard

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.7.2

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided; description only says 'validate', which implies read-only, but doesn't confirm lack of side effects, permissions needed, or whether it returns a pass/fail result.

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?

Single sentence is efficient and front-loaded with key verbs and nouns. Could potentially add more context without losing conciseness.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Despite having an output schema, the description omits what the tool returns (list of issues, status, etc.) and doesn't clarify the meaning of 'layout graph integrity' or 'chart reference health'. Insufficient for a validation tool.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema has 0% description coverage and description adds no parameter explanation. response_mode enum values are not described; dashboard_id is obvious but not explained.

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?

Description clearly states the tool validates dashboard layout graph integrity and chart reference health, distinguishing it from broader validation tools like validate_dashboard and repair tools.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool vs siblings like validate_dashboard or repair_dashboard_chart_refs. Agent has to infer from tool name and description.

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