mcp-chat-cards

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Start an efficient prompt

create_prompt_gist_card

Open an interactive card that asks users to describe the gist of their goal for the efficient-prompt flow, then returns the gist with rules for the remaining steps.

Instructions

Open step 1 of the efficient-prompt flow: a card asking the user to describe, in no more than 350 characters, the gist of where they want to go. Call this when a message is tagged [efficient-prompt], or when the user asks for help writing a prompt. Submitting the card sends back the gist along with the rules for the rest of the flow, so answer with the card and wait rather than asking follow-up questions in chat.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`title`	No
`question`	No	Replaces the default gist question when you already know what they are circling
`subtitle`	No
`placeholder`	No	Placeholder text inside the gist textarea
`contextActions`	No	Right-click menu actions the model anticipates being useful. Choosing one sends its prompt to the conversation; use {{selection}} to include the user's selected text.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`card`	Yes
`parts`	Yes	Split state, present on EVERY card result so one completeness check works for all card types. Cards that cannot split always report {current:1,total:1,hasMore:false}; create_markdown_card and create_code_tour_card pack oversized content into parts and can report more. Read hasMore rather than the card title to decide whether content was withheld.
`display`	No	Present only when the host is not mounting this server's MCP Apps template (see MCP_CHAT_CARDS_RENDER): the card ships as a ready-made visualizer widget instead.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.0-alpha.1.0.1Oct 17, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / display

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "description": "Present only when the host is not mounting this server's MCP Apps template (see MCP_CHAT_CARDS_RENDER): the card ships as a ready-made visualizer widget instead.",
+  "properties": {
+    "action": {
+      "description": "What the caller must do to put the card in front of the user",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "loading_messages": {
+      "description": "show_widget loading_messages",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "shown": {
+      "description": "False: the user cannot see this card until action is taken",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "title": {
+      "description": "show_widget title (snake_case)",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "widget_code": {
+      "description": "show_widget widget_code, passed unchanged",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "shown",
+    "action",
+    "title",
+    "loading_messages",
+    "widget_code"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Addedv0.2.0-alphaAug 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose key behavior: submitting the card returns the gist plus the flow rules, and the agent should wait instead of asking follow-ups. It does not cover permissions or error conditions, but for a UI card launcher this is substantial behavioral context.

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?

Two sentences are used efficiently, front-loading the purpose and flow step before the trigger conditions and behavior. The 350-character detail is embedded usefully, though the sentence is dense with instructions.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With an output schema present, the description need not explain return values, and it focuses on when and how to call. It is largely complete for a card-launcher tool, though it could better distinguish itself from the similarly named create_efficient_prompt_card sibling.

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 60%, so the schema does most of the work for parameters like question and contextActions. The description adds the 350-character limit and the gist concept, but does not explain the title, subtitle, or placeholder parameters, leaving a moderate 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: opening step 1 of the efficient-prompt flow via a card that asks the user to describe their goal gist. It clarifies the tool's role but does not distinguish it from its close sibling create_efficient_prompt_card, which remains ambiguous.

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 triggers (a message tagged [efficient-prompt], or a user asking for help writing a prompt) and even directs the agent to wait rather than follow up in chat. The when-to-use context is complete and actionable.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.