Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
QGIS MCP Server

QGIS MCP Server

by LuiccianDev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Create Layout

create_layout

Create a new print layout for map output by setting its name, page size, and portrait or landscape orientation.

Instructions

Create a new print layout. page_size: e.g. 'A4', 'A3', 'Letter'. orientation: 'landscape' or 'portrait'.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "create_layout"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
page_sizeNoA4
orientationNolandscape

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does little: it does not say whether the layout is persisted, whether the name must be unique, what permissions or project state are required, or what is returned. Only the two optional parameters' accepted values are clarified.

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?

Two short sentences plus two terse parameter hints, front-loaded with the action. The fragment style ('page_size: e.g. ...') is efficient though slightly abrupt; nothing is wasted.

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?

For a simple three-parameter creation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the definition covers the action and two option domains but omits what the call returns and the semantics of the required name. Adequate to invoke, incomplete for confident use.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It usefully enumerates allowed values for page_size ('A4', 'A3', 'Letter') and orientation ('landscape'/'portrait'), which the schema lacks, but it says nothing about the required 'name' parameter, leaving the single mandatory input undefined.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource, 'Create a new print layout', which an agent can easily distinguish from siblings like add_layout_label or export_layout. It stops short of any explicit sibling differentiation, but the purpose itself is unambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites (e.g., an open project), and no note about what happens if a layout with the same name exists. The agent must infer all usage context.

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