Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ChartQuery MCP Server

ChartQuery MCP Server

by chartquery
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Chart View

chart_view
Read-only

View a previously saved chart as an interactive HTML page using its chart ID; embed it in an iframe or share it publicly without an API key.

Instructions

Chart View. View a previously saved chart as an interactive HTML page. Public, no API key required. Iframe-embeddable.

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>"
    },
    "name": "chart_view"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe chart ID returned in the X-Chart-View-URL header when saving a chart. Format: cq-xxxxxxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx.
shareNoSet share=true to persist the config and receive JSON instead of an image: { id, render_url, view_url, embed_url, expires_in }. Free plan: 3-day expiry with watermark. Paid plan: 6-month expiry, no branding. Default: false.
fieldsNoComma-separated list of fields to keep in the response, with dot notation for nested fields (e.g. name,location.city). Does not change the credit cost.

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?

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, non-destructive, open world), and the description adds genuinely new operational context: it is public, needs no API key, and is iframe-embeddable. It does not elaborate on what changes when share=true (persisting config, expiry, watermark), but the schema already carries that detail.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, followed by access and embedding constraints. The opening 'Chart View.' merely restates the title and is the only wasted fragment.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a read-only viewer with three fully documented parameters and no output schema, the description covers what the agent needs: what it returns (an interactive HTML page), access requirements, and embedding suitability. The share-mode return shape is already spelled out in the schema.

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 id, share, and fields are fully documented in the schema itself. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the work.

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 — 'View a previously saved chart as an interactive HTML page' — and the qualifier 'previously saved' implicitly separates it from render/create siblings like chart_render or chart_ai. It does not name those siblings outright, so an agent must infer the split rather than being told.

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?

Usage is implied by 'previously saved chart' (you must already have an ID) plus the note that it is public and requires no API key. There is no explicit when-to-use-nor-when-not guidance and no mention of chart_render/chart/diagram_view as alternatives, so the routing decision is left partly to inference.

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