Skip to main content
Glama

playcal_ui

Render run history as a static HTML page, newest first, so you can inspect loops, observations, and replays in one visual timeline.

Instructions

draw the run history (loop, observe, replay, visual) as one static HTML page, newest first

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": "playcal_ui"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
outNowhere to write the page (default .playcal/ui.html).playcal/ui.html
lastNoonly the newest N runs
openNoopen the page in the default browser
historyNohistory file (default: $PLAYCAL_HISTORY or .playcal/history.jsonl)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.1

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden and does not meet it. It reveals that output is a static HTML page written to a file and ordered newest-first, but does not disclose whether an existing file is overwritten, that the 'open' flag launches an external browser process, or what happens on an empty/missing history file.

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?

A single short clause with the artifact and ordering front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though the terseness borders on under-specification for a file-writing tool with browser-launch side effects.

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?

Four optional parameters, no annotations and no output schema means the description is the agent's only source of behavioral context, and it omits write/overwrite semantics and the browser-launch side effect. For a tool that produces files and can spawn a UI, this leaves meaningful gaps.

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 'out', 'last', 'open' and 'history' are already documented, and the baseline is 3. The description only adds the 'newest first' ordering context, which mildly informs 'last' but adds little beyond the schema.

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 ('draw') and resource ('run history (loop, observe, replay, visual)') and the output artifact ('one static HTML page'), which is concrete enough to distinguish it from playcal_query or playcal_logs. It stops short of naming close siblings such as playcal_report or playcal_visual, so the differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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?

With 20 sibling tools, including several that also summarize runs (playcal_report, playcal_logs, playcal_query, playcal_visual), there is no guidance on when to pick this one over those alternatives. The only usage signal is implicit in the purpose itself; no exclusions or prerequisites (e.g. needing an existing history file) are given.

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