Skip to main content
Glama
KasayoDotCom

Identity Forge MCP

Official

Compose a layer onto a brand

add_brand_layer

Adds a design record to a brand project's axis (image direction, interface style, or page recipe), pinning the chosen revision. Handles single-value axes with replace and rejects conflicts.

Instructions

Put one catalogue record onto a brand project alongside its design kit, so the choice is stored on the user's brand rather than living in this conversation. One tool for all three axes: pass axis to say which. The layers belong to the PROJECT and not to the kit, so swapping the kit later leaves them alone — that independence is the whole point of composing axes separately. The pin records the revision the record is at right now, which is what lets get_brand_layers later report that it moved instead of silently applying someone else's edit to the user's brand. recordId is the record's permanent id from list_image_directions, list_interface_styles or list_page_recipes, never a slug: slugs are mutable handles and a pin keyed on one could come to mean a different record. imageDirection and interfaceStyle hold ONE each, so composing a second is refused with 409 unless you pass replace: true — which is also how you accept a drifted revision after the user has seen what changed. Page recipes are a list and simply accumulate. A Pro record on a key without Pro is refused with 403 and an upgrade path; that is not a conflict and replace will not help. This overwrites live brand state without asking and mints a version recording that your key did it. Requires the kits:write scope.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
axisYesWhich axis this record belongs to. imageDirection and interfaceStyle hold one each; pageRecipe holds any number.
replaceNoReplace what is already on a single-value axis, or accept a revision that has drifted. Ignored for pageRecipe, which is a list. Default false, so a clash is reported rather than overwritten.
recordIdYesThe record's permanent id (the `id` field), not its slug. From list_image_directions, list_interface_styles or list_page_recipes.
projectIdYesOwned brand project id from list_brand_projects.
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description takes full responsibility and excels: it discloses destructive behavior ('overwrites live brand state without asking'), audit trail ('mints a version'), auth scope ('kits:write'), and error semantics (409, 403). This is exemplary transparency for a mutation tool.

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 long but every sentence earns its place: purpose, axis behavior, project/kit independence, pin rationale, recordId warning, conflict rules, 403 edge case, and side effects. It is front-loaded with the core action and contains 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 complex mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, this description is remarkably complete. It covers purpose, usage, safety, error conditions, auth, and param semantics, even explaining upgrade paths and version minting – fully sufficient for safe and correct invocation.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Despite 100% schema coverage, the description adds significant meaning: it explains why recordId must be a permanent id (slugs are mutable), how single-value axes conflict vs pageRecipe accumulating, and the purpose of replace for drifted revisions. This goes beyond schema 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?

The description clearly states 'Put one catalogue record onto a brand project alongside its design kit' – a specific verb, resource, and outcome. It explicitly says 'One tool for all three axes' and differentiates layer composition from siblings like get_brand_layers and remove_brand_layer.

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?

Provides explicit usage guidance: 'One tool for all three axes: pass axis to say which' and explains when to use replace (conflict or drifted revision) and when not to (Pro/403). It also references get_brand_layers to explain the pin behavior, giving clear context for when this tool is appropriate.

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/KasayoDotCom/identityforge-mcp'

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