Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
staruml-mcp

staruml-mcp

by ezrabrilliant
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

save_project_as

Save the current StarUML project to a new absolute .mdj file path.

Instructions

Save the current StarUML project to a new path. Requires staruml-mcp-extension to be installed in StarUML. Install from https://github.com/ezrabrilliant/staruml-mcp-extension

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": {
      "filename": "<filename>"
    },
    "name": "save_project_as"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
filenameYesAbsolute path for the .mdj file

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.3

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. 'Save' implies mutation, but it does not explain side effects like whether the original project remains open or if the tool changes the current project to the new path. Missing details on what happens after saving.

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?

Two efficient sentences: first states purpose, second gives extension requirement with link. No redundancy, front-loaded, every sentence earns its place.

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 mutation tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description lacks information on return values, error conditions, and state changes. The agent is left unsure about the outcome of the operation.

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 coverage is 100% with a clear description for the single parameter 'filename'. The tool description adds the extension requirement, which is helpful context but not directly about parameter semantics. Baseline 3 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 clearly states the action 'save' and the resource 'current StarUML project' with the qualifier 'to a new path', distinguishing it from the sibling 'save_project' tool which saves to the current path.

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 implies using this tool to save to a different location than the current project file, and mentions the prerequisite extension. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare to alternatives like 'save_project'.

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