Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-for-cascadeur

mcp-for-cascadeur

by Rickcy
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

scene_new

Destructive

Create and activate a new scene tab while preserving existing tabs, so you can start work in a separate scene without closing current Cascadeur scenes.

Instructions

Create and activate a new scene tab, preserving existing tabs.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "scene_new"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true; the description adds that the new tab becomes active and that existing tabs are preserved. However, 'preserving existing tabs' sits in tension with destructiveHint=true and the description never clarifies whether unsaved content in the current scene survives, which matters for a destructive 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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the create/activate action and trailing the scoping clause about existing tabs. No filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 zero-parameter tool this covers the essential action, but it omits what the new scene contains (empty vs. default template) and does not explain the safety implication implied by destructiveHint. With no output schema, the agent also gets no hint of what identifier or state comes back.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline of 4 applies. The schema is empty with additionalProperties=false, leaving no ambiguity an agent could misread.

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: 'Create and activate a new scene tab'. The word 'new' distinguishes it from sibling tools scene_activate and scene_open, though those siblings are never named explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: 'new' signals this is the creation path rather than activation of an existing scene (scene_activate) or opening a file (scene_open). No explicit when-to-use, prerequisites, or named alternatives are given.

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