Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-screen

mcp-screen

by ashark-ai-05
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

reply_annotation

Answers a human's canvas annotation question and posts the response in a thread bubble next to their mark.

Instructions

Answer a question the human left on the canvas (a circle, arrow, highlight or sticky note with text). Your reply appears in a thread bubble next to their mark. read_canvas lists unanswered ones under pendingQuestions, with the widget and data points they point at; answer about exactly that. A human follow-up in the thread makes it pending again.

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": {
      "id": "<id>",
      "text": "<text>"
    },
    "name": "reply_annotation"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe annotation id from read_canvas.
textYesYour answer (plain text, short).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.1.1

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It discloses that the reply appears in a thread bubble, that pending questions come from read_canvas's pendingQuestions list, and that a human follow-up reopens the thread as pending. It does not cover permissions, error handling, or whether the reply can be edited or deleted, which are important for a write operation.

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?

The description is three sentences, front-loaded with the core action, followed by the visible effect, and then the relevant workflow. Every sentence provides useful information without redundancy.

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?

For a simple two-parameter reply tool with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the description is mostly complete: it covers purpose, workflow, and effect. It could be improved by mentioning error cases or clarifying its relationship with reply_oldest_pending, but no critical calling information is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by specifying that the id must come from read_canvas's pendingQuestions and that the answer should be about exactly the widget and data points the annotation points to. This clarifies the expected content of the text parameter beyond its schema description.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Answer a question the human left on the canvas'. It distinguishes itself from read_canvas by noting that read_canvas lists unanswered questions while this tool replies. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from reply_oldest_pending, another sibling that likely performs a similar reply action.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides clear context for when to use the tool: after read_canvas surfaces pendingQuestions, answer about exactly that annotation. It also explains that a follow-up makes the thread pending again, implying ongoing use. It does not mention exclusions or when to prefer reply_oldest_pending, which is a notable gap given that sibling.

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