PitchDeck MCP Server
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| generate_pitch_deckB | Generate a professional AI-powered pitch deck for a startup or business. Returns a complete slide deck with title, problem, solution, market, business model, traction, team, financials, and closing slides. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 1 tool
With only one tool, there is no possibility of ambiguity or overlap between tools, as there are no other tools to confuse it with. The tool's purpose is clearly defined and distinct by default.
The single tool name 'generate_pitch_deck' follows a clear verb_noun pattern, and with no other tools, consistency is inherently perfect. There are no deviations or mixed conventions to evaluate.
A single tool is too few for a server named 'PitchDeck MCP Server', which suggests a broader domain like pitch deck creation and management. This minimal toolset feels thin and limits functionality, as it only covers generation without supporting operations like editing, listing, or deleting pitch decks.
The tool surface is severely incomplete for the implied domain of pitch deck management. While generation is covered, there are significant gaps such as updating existing decks, retrieving or listing decks, deleting decks, or handling slide-level operations, which will likely cause agent failures in broader workflows.