rive-mcp

by ODU33104

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Local

Diff two .riv files

riv_diff

Compare two .riv files to reveal structural changes, including type-count shifts and per-object property differences.

Instructions

Structural diff between two .riv files: type count changes and per-object property differences.

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": {
      "pathA": "<pathA>",
      "pathB": "<pathB>"
    },
    "name": "riv_diff"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`pathA`	Yes	Path to the first .riv file
`pathB`	Yes	Path to the second .riv file
`maxDiffs`	No	Max object diffs to list (default 30)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.8.0Oct 29, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / pathA / description
```
Added value: +"Path to the first .riv file"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / pathB / description
```
Added value: +"Path to the second .riv file"
```
First observedv0.5.0Aug 5, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses what the diff reports (type counts, per-object property diffs), which is real behavioral content, but says nothing about read-only semantics, error behavior on invalid/mismatched files, or that the per-object list is truncated.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that names the resource, the operation, and the two comparison axes with no filler. Nothing to trim and nothing buried.

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?

The tool is simple and its parameters are fully documented in the schema, but with no output schema the description should convey the return shape more concretely. It hints at result content (count deltas, property differences) yet omits result structure and truncation behavior.

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 100%, so pathA/pathB/maxDiffs are already documented, and the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema — notably it never mentions that the per-object diff list is capped by maxDiffs (default 30), which is the one non-obvious parameter behavior.

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 (structural diff of two .riv files) plus the exact dimensions compared: type count changes and per-object property differences. This implicitly separates it from riv_visual_diff, but the sibling is never named, so an agent must infer that 'structural' excludes rendering/pixel comparison.

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?

The description gives no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (are the files required to be valid/parsable?), and no explicit routing to alternatives. With riv_visual_diff, riv_ab_compare, and riv_inspect in the sibling set, the absence of any exclusion or selection criteria leaves the agent to guess.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.