Skip to main content
Glama
dokaNc

IlluGen MCP

by dokaNc
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Project summary

project_summary
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get an overview of an IlluGen project's nodes, links, settings, export options, and annotations. Use it to find node IDs before edits or verify the graph after changes; offline and read-only.

Instructions

Gives an overview of a project: its nodes, links, export settings, annotations and main settings.

Use it to get node ids before node_get, node_set or link_add, and to check the graph after edits; use
node_get for every value of a single node. Offline and read-only.
Returns: path, graph (scope shown), app_version, settings (frames_per_second, loop_region, default texture
size...), annotations {groups, notes} in index order, node_count and nodes [{id, type, label, pos, links
going out of the node, export settings for Node_Export_* nodes, subgraph_nodes for subgraphs}].

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYesAbsolute path of the .illugen project file.
graphNoGraph to work in: empty for the top-level graph, or the id or label of a Node_Subgraph node ('outer/inner' for nested subgraphs).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.1.2
    • addedInput schema / properties / graph / description
      Added value: +"Graph to work in: empty for the top-level graph, or the id or label of a Node_Subgraph node ('outer/inner' for nested subgraphs)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / path / description
      Added value: +"Absolute path of the .illugen project file."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, closed-world, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable context beyond that by spelling out the return payload (path, graph scope, app_version, settings, annotations ordering, node_count, node fields, subgraph nodes) and the fact that it works offline; the only mild redundancy is restating 'read-only'.

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?

The description is front-loaded with purpose, then usage routing, then return structure, so an agent can act on it quickly. The return list is long but earns its space because there is no output schema; the only small waste is repeating 'read-only' already covered by annotations.

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?

With no output schema, the description fully enumerates the returned fields an agent needs, including nested node details and subgraph nodes. Annotations cover the safety profile and the schema covers parameters, so nothing material is missing for a read-oriented summary tool.

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 both path and graph are already documented in the input schema. The description only alludes to the graph parameter via 'scope shown' without adding syntax or edge-case meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Gives an overview of a project' and enumerates what that overview includes (nodes, links, export settings, annotations, main settings). It clearly distinguishes itself from the sibling node_get by routing single-node reads elsewhere.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It gives explicit when-to-use guidance: get node ids before node_get/node_set/link_add, and check the graph after edits. It also names the alternative (node_get) and the condition that selects it, leaving nothing 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