Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
jwmcp

jwmcp

by Koheui
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

scan_overlay

Overlay a drawing onto a scan to check alignment and calibration. Use region_px to zoom into specific areas for detailed inspection.

Instructions

Draw a drawing on top of the scan to check alignment (needs calibration). region_px zooms.

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": {
      "scan_id": "<scan_id>",
      "drawing": "<drawing>"
    },
    "name": "scan_overlay"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNo
alphaNo
drawingYes
scan_idYes
width_pxNo
region_pxNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions a calibration prerequisite, which is valuable, but says nothing about side effects, whether it renders or generates an image, or what happens with invalid scan_id. Behavioral disclosure is thin.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Very short and front-loaded with the main action. The parenthetical calibration note and the region_px comment are packed in, though slightly terse.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a 6-parameter tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, this description is far too sparse. Key parameters and the rendering/output behavior are undocumented.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It briefly explains region_px ('zooms') and draws attention to calibration, but leaves page, alpha, width_px, drawing, and scan_id entirely unexplained despite 6 parameters.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: draw/overlay a drawing on a scan to check alignment. It's distinguishable from siblings like scan_view or drawing_preview. Slightly informal ('Draw a drawing') but the purpose is clear.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

Only hints usage via 'needs calibration', pointing implicitly at scan_calibrate, but gives no explicit when-to-use vs scan_view/scan_preview alternatives. An agent could confuse this with other scan rendering tools.

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