Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
moki-whiteboard

moki-whiteboard

by JKZeng-cell
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

添加白板元素

whiteboard_add_elements

Add sticky notes, text, shapes, arrows, drawings, mind maps, images, files, or links to a whiteboard page in batches. Use world coordinates or omit positions for automatic layout.

Instructions

Add sticky notes, text, shapes, arrows, drawings, mind maps, images, files, or links in batches. Positions use canvas world coordinates; omitted positions are arranged automatically. 批量添加便签、文本、图形、箭头、画笔、思维导图、图片、文件或链接。坐标是无限画布世界坐标；省略坐标时自动排列。

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": {
      "pageId": "<pageId>",
      "elements": "<elements>"
    },
    "name": "whiteboard_add_elements"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageIdYes
boardIdNo白板 ID；省略时使用最近更新的白板，建议始终指定准确 IDdefault
elementsYes
expectedVersionNo先 inspect 获得版本；过期写入会返回 VERSION_CONFLICT 而不会覆盖内容

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
boardNo
errorNo
boardsNo
pageIdNo
boardIdNo
currentNo
deletedNo
versionNo
alignedIdsNo
deletedIdsNo
elementIdsNo
updatedIdsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.7

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false and idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is already structured. The description adds two genuinely new facts — canvas world coordinates and auto-placement of omitted positions — but never warns that repeated calls duplicate content (given idempotentHint=false), never mentions the 200-element batch cap, or the VERSION_CONFLICT behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The English sentence is well front-loaded — verb and element kinds first, coordinate semantics second. But the entire text is duplicated verbatim in Chinese, which doubles the length without adding information an agent needs, diluting the conciseness.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, and the description covers element kinds and coordinate behavior. Missing for a mutation tool with 4 parameters: the element-count ceiling, any indication that pageId must come from a prior inspect, and the consequence of stale writes beyond what the expectedVersion schema text already says.

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 description coverage is only 50%, but the description compensates for the most ambiguous parameters by explaining that x/y are infinite-canvas world coordinates and that omitting them triggers automatic arrangement. The remaining element fields (kind, text, width, height) are largely self-describing via enum values, so the gap is acceptable.

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?

The description names a specific verb ('Add') and enumerates the exact resource kinds accepted (sticky notes, text, shapes, arrows, drawings, mind maps, images, files, links), plus the batch scope. It does not name whiteboard_update_elements or whiteboard_align_elements as alternatives, so sibling differentiation is left to inference.

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?

Usage is implied by 'in batches' and by the note that omitted positions are auto-arranged, which tells the agent this tool can be called without coordinates. However, there is no explicit when-to-use versus whiteboard_update_elements or whiteboard_align_elements, and no stated prerequisites such as needing a pageId from whiteboard_inspect.

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