Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
claucloverleaf

claucloverleaf

by SolthaX
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

overleaf_compile

Read-only

Compile an Overleaf project and report LaTeX errors with file, line, and message, because Overleaf may show success despite errors.

Instructions

Compile the project and report LaTeX errors (file, line, message).

Overleaf reports 'success' even when the document has errors (LaTeX recovers), so always look at the error list.

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": {
      "project": "<project>"
    },
    "name": "overleaf_compile"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
draftNoFast draft compile (no images).
projectYesProject id, Overleaf project URL, or exact project name.
include_logNoAppend the raw LaTeX log (long).
include_warningsNoAlso list warnings and bad boxes.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Goes meaningfully beyond the annotations by disclosing a non-obvious behavior: Overleaf reports 'success' even when the document has errors because LaTeX recovers, so the error list must be inspected. That is exactly the kind of trap an agent needs warning about. It stops short of mentioning build duration, concurrency limits, or whether a failed compile blocks state changes.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and its output, followed by the critical caveat. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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

Completeness4/5

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

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not required, and the description supplies the key interpretation guidance about false 'success' signals. The only gap is context about the relationship to sibling tools that also build the project, which would help an agent choose correctly.

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%, with all four parameters (project, draft, include_log, include_warnings) fully documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-level detail such as what 'project' accepts or how include_log affects output size.

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 ('Compile the project') plus what it returns ('report LaTeX errors (file, line, message)'), which is far more informative than the bare name. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools such as overleaf_download_pdf, which may also trigger a build, so it falls short of full sibling differentiation.

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?

The 'always look at the error list' sentence gives clear guidance on interpreting results, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance relative to alternatives (e.g., compiling vs. downloading the PDF) and no stated prerequisites or exclusions. Usage is implied rather than framed as a decision rule.

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