Skip to main content
Glama

view_sheet

Render a plan sheet or tight crop as PNG to inspect linework, labels, and committed shapes. Burn overlays, grids, or disclosure marks to verify geometry and read dimensions.

Instructions

SEE the sheet — render the page (or a crop of it) to a PNG image. This is your eyes on the plan, so CROP, DON'T SQUINT: the render downsamples to the px budget (≤2000 long side), which on an E-size sheet is ~4 sheet pixels per returned pixel — a full-sheet render finds WHERE things are, and only a tight region crop can tell you what the linework and labels actually say. Never audit a trace or read a dimension off a full-sheet render. region is in image px — the same space as every other tool — so a feature at pixel (ix, iy) of the returned image sits at x = region_x0 + ix × (region_x1 − region_x0) / img_w (same for y), and those coordinates go straight into one_click, measure_polygon, or read_sheet_text. overlay:true burns the session's committed shapes into the render (human-affirmed ink solid red, unreviewed machine shapes dashed blue) — render again after committing to verify your geometry landed where you intended, and sanity-check what you see: a fixture-sized ring where a room should be means the seed landed inside a stall or casework; an outsized ring means the flood escaped through an opening. To MEASURE rather than guess, pass grid: a calibrated measuring grid is burned in — thin lines every 1 ft, heavy blue every 5 ft, foot labels along the crop edges, feet counted from the crop's top-left corner. Count grid cells between walls exactly like an estimator scaling a plan; never derive a dimension by eye when the grid can give it to you. grid "auto" uses the sheet's set scale; before set_scale, pass the drawing scale read off the title block as inches-per-foot — "1/4" for a 1/4" = 1'-0" plan, "3/16", "0.25". marks (#297) burns DISCLOSURE layers into the render, so what a reply names, the picture shows: pass the coordinate lists a tool disclosed — question: withheld placements (orange ?-circles), struck: rejections a counter-example or luminance gate refused (magenta struck ×), ring: reference points like the sweep's own seed (violet double ring). The colors sit deliberately off the common CAD pens so they cannot vanish into color-plotted work. An overlay audit without marks shows only committed ink — the validation trap where 37 disclosed near-misses read as "it missed them". Rendering needs the optional native canvas (@napi-rs/canvas); where it isn't installed this tool errors cleanly and every other tool still works. Coordinates are image px at render scale 2.0: PDF pt × 2, origin top-left, y down (the browser canvas's native space). Sheet payloads carry dims in both px and pt.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pxNoLong-side pixel budget of the returned image (default 1400) — small region + high px = readable dimension strings
gridNoBurn in a calibrated 1-ft/5-ft measuring grid: "auto" = the sheet's set scale; otherwise the drawing scale as inches-per-foot, e.g. "1/4", "3/16", "0.25"
marksNoDisclosure marks to burn into the render (#297): what the reply names, the picture shows. Coordinates in image px
sheetYes
regionNoCrop rect in image px (origin top-left, y down); omit for the full sheet
overlayNoBurn committed shapes into the render (solid = human-affirmed, dashed = unreviewed)
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral load. It discloses the 2000-px long-side limit, the coordinate mapping formula, the visual semantics of overlay (solid vs dashed, colors), the grid's meaning (1-ft/5-ft lines, labels), the marks meaning (colors and shapes), and the dependency on a native canvas module with graceful degradation. It also warns about render precision and how to verify geometry.

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?

Though long, the description is dense and every sentence carries essential guidance. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and crop guidance, then proceeds logically through coordinate mapping, overlay, grid, marks, and canvas dependency. No fluff; each clause earns its place.

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?

With no output schema, the description fully explains return behavior (image, pixel coordinate mapping), all parameter effects (grid, overlay, marks), the required canvas dependency with failure mode, and a coordinate conversion formula. The only minor omission is an explicit statement of return type, but it is clearly implied by 'returns a PNG image' and the coordinate discussion. Complete for an agent to call correctly.

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?

Every parameter is explained well beyond the schema's one-liners: region is defined as image px and the coordinate mapping formula is given; grid specifies feet counts and colors; overlay explains solid vs dashed and their meaning; marks details each visual symbol and its purpose. The description makes each parameter operationally clear.

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 opens with a clear verb and resource: 'SEE the page (or a crop of it) as a PNG image.' It immediately distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explaining that it is the visual counterpart to measure_polygon and read_sheet_text, and it gives concrete use cases (locating vs reading details). Purpose is unmistakable.

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?

Usage guidance is explicit and actionable: full-sheet renders for orientation, tight crops for reading linework/dimensions, and a precise warning never to audit a trace or read a dimension off a full-sheet render. It also tells the agent when to re-render with overlay:true to verify geometry and how to use grid for measurement. Alternatives are named directly (measure_polygon, read_sheet_text, one_click).

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/Kentucky-ai/opentakeoff'

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