Run QGIS Processing algorithms without a GUI by passing an algorithm name and parameter dictionary.
Run a QGIS Processing algorithm (e.g. 'native:buffer') headlessly with a parameters dict. / Processing ალგორითმი.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| algorithm | Yes | ||
| parameters | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It says 'headlessly' but discloses nothing about execution duration, whether the algorithm runs on the current project state, error behavior for invalid algorithm IDs, or what is returned when an output schema is absent.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The English sentence is tight and front-loaded, but the trailing Georgian fragment 'Processing ალგორითმი' adds no information and appears to be a truncated duplicate, diluting an otherwise efficient description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a tool whose core input is an arbitrary parameters dict and which has no output schema or annotations, the description is not complete enough: an agent gets no guidance on constructing the dict or on interpreting results.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0% across both parameters. The description compensates only for 'algorithm' by giving the example 'native:buffer'; the 'parameters' dict is a free-form nested object with additionalProperties=true and receives no explanation of expected keys or value formats.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb and resource: run a QGIS Processing algorithm headlessly, with a concrete example ('native:buffer'). However it does not distinguish itself from the sibling headless_command or headless_list_algorithms, which an agent must choose between.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No statement of when to use this versus headless_command (which presumably runs arbitrary code/commands) or headless_list_algorithms (to discover algorithm IDs). No prerequisites or context given; usage must be inferred entirely from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.