Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-canva

mcp-canva

by bryankwandou
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

canva_list_brand_templates

List Canva brand templates for Pro, Teams, or Enterprise accounts, optionally filtered by query, to find approved designs for reuse.

Instructions

List brand templates (Canva Pro/Teams/Enterprise).

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": "canva_list_brand_templates"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does add one genuinely useful disclosure — that brand templates require Canva Pro/Teams/Enterprise — but says nothing about read-only nature, pagination, or return shape.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler, and the resource is stated immediately. Efficiency is good, though the brevity is partly under-specification rather than tight editing.

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?

For a tool with no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented parameter, the description is too thin. An agent cannot tell what the query parameter accepts or what the listing returns, which are the two things it would need to invoke this correctly.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% and the single optional 'query' parameter is undocumented in both schema and description. The description never mentions what query does (name search? filter syntax?), so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 (list brand templates) that is distinguishable from the sibling canva_list_designs. However, it does not explicitly name or contrast with that sibling, so the differentiation is left to the reader's inference from the resource noun.

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?

No guidance on when to choose this tool over canva_list_designs or canva_brand_template_fields, and no mention of the optional query filter. The only context is a plan-tier parenthetical, which is an entitlement note rather than usage direction.

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