Skip to main content
Glama
Hackeatutiempo

Mapache

by Hackeatutiempo
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

Add a mind map

add_mindmap

Create a new mind map on an existing board from an indented outline. Sets the central idea and branches, saves as a revision, and appears live.

Instructions

Add another, separate mind map to an existing board (a board can hold several). The first line of the outline is its central idea and the indented lines its branches. It is placed in free space unless you give x and y. It is saved at once as a new revision of the board and appears live in any browser that has it open (the person can undo it with Ctrl+Z). Returns the id of its central idea. To grow a map that already exists use add_nodes.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
xNoPosition of the central idea in board units. Usually leave x and y out
yNoSee x
boardYesBoard id or title. Use "open" for the board the person has open in the app
linesNoShape of the branch lines (default curvy)
layoutNohorizontal (default): branches to the left and right. vertical: grows downwards like an org chart
outlineYesIndented outline, one idea per line; indent (2 spaces or a tab) to nest. Markdown inside a line: **bold**, *italic*, `code`, [link](https://…)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.5.3
    • addedInput schema / properties / layout / description
      Added value: +"horizontal (default): branches to the left and right. vertical: grows downwards like an org chart"
    • addedInput schema / properties / lines / description
      Added value: +"Shape of the branch lines (default curvy)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / x / description
      Added value: +"Position of the central idea in board units. Usually leave x and y out"
    • addedInput schema / properties / y / description
      Added value: +"See x"
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnly=false, idempotent=false, destructive=false. The description goes well beyond: it saves immediately as a new revision, appears live in open browsers, is undoable via Ctrl+Z, and returns the central idea's id. This is exactly the extra context the annotation bar requires.

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?

Every sentence earns its place: purpose, outline semantics, placement, side effects, return value, and alternative routing. Front-loaded with the core action and no filler.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a 6-param mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers placement behavior, persistence/live-sync side effects, the return value, and the alternative tool. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% so the baseline is 3, but the description adds conceptual meaning beyond the schema by explaining that the first outline line is the central idea and indented lines are branches, and that x/y are optional placement in free space. That is real value over the schema's field descriptions.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (add a separate mind map to an existing board), clarifies a board can hold several, and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling add_nodes. An agent can tell it apart from the nodes tools without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly routes the agent: 'To grow a map that already exists use add_nodes.' It also names the when-not condition (existing map vs. new map), leaving nothing to inference.

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