Skip to main content
Glama
jhauga
by jhauga

Create tab card

create_tab_card

Create an interactive tabbed card to present multiple contexts of a single topic, such as code samples per language. Include plain text, HTML, or code blocks with copy buttons for easy comparison.

Instructions

Render an interactive card with tabs, each showing a different context of the same subject (for example one tab per programming language, OS, or skill level). Tab content can be plain text, HTML, or code with a copy button.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tabsYes
titleYes
subtitleNo
tutorTermsNoEducational tutor terms. The first occurrence of each term in the card's visible prose is underlined; hovering ~1.2s shows the tip and notifies the host so the model can follow up. Terms are matched once per card, longest first, and never inside code samples, tooltips, or another term's tip. Matching is CASE-SENSITIVE, so "PATH" does not attach its tip to a filesystem "path"; set caseInsensitive on a term to match any casing. Term and tip are PLAIN text.
contextActionsNoRight-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

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cardYes
partsYesSplit 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.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changedv0.1.3-alpha
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • changedInput schema / properties / tutorTerms / description
      Previous value: -"Educational tutor terms. The first occurrence of each term in the card's visible prose is underlined; hovering ~1.2s shows the tip and notifies the host so the model can follow up. Terms are matched once per card, longest first, and never inside code samples, tooltips, or another term's tip. Term and tip are PLAIN text."New value: +"Educational tutor terms. The first occurrence of each term in the card's visible prose is underlined; hovering ~1.2s shows the tip and notifies the host so the model can follow up. Terms are matched once per card, longest first, and never inside code samples, tooltips, or another term's tip. Matching is CASE-SENSITIVE, so \"PATH\" does not attach its tip to a filesystem \"path\"; set caseInsensitive on a term to match any casing. Term and tip are PLAIN text."
    • addedInput schema / properties / tutorTerms / items / properties / caseInsensitive
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Match the term regardless of letter case (default false)",
      +  "type": "boolean"
      +}
    • removedOutput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • addedOutput schema / properties / parts
      Added value: +{
      +  "additionalProperties": false,
      +  "description": "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.",
      +  "properties": {
      +    "current": {
      +      "description": "Part number this result rendered (1-based)",
      +      "type": "number"
      +    },
      +    "hasMore": {
      +      "description": "True when content was withheld; call again with part: current + 1",
      +      "type": "boolean"
      +    },
      +    "total": {
      +      "description": "How many parts the content splits into",
      +      "type": "number"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "required": [
      +    "current",
      +    "total",
      +    "hasMore"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • changedOutput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "card"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "card",
      +  "parts"
      +]
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.1-alpha
    • changedInput schema / properties / tutorTerms / description
      Previous value: -"Educational tutor terms. Occurrences in the card are underlined; hovering ~1.2s shows the tip and notifies the host so the model can follow up."New value: +"Educational tutor terms. The first occurrence of each term in the card's visible prose is underlined; hovering ~1.2s shows the tip and notifies the host so the model can follow up. Terms are matched once per card, longest first, and never inside code samples, tooltips, or another term's tip. Term and tip are PLAIN text."
  3. First observedv0.0.0-alpha

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. It discloses that the card is interactive, tabbed, and supports plain text, HTML, and code with a copy button. It does not mention behaviors like HTML sanitization or tutor-term hover interactions, though those are already documented in the schema fields, so the gap is moderate rather than severe.

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?

The description is a single well-structured sentence that front-loads the core operation, then provides concrete examples and content-type options. Every phrase earns its place and there is no filler or repetition of schema details.

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?

The tool's core purpose is clearly explained, and the schema richly documents the optional tutorTerms and contextActions behaviors, while an output schema is present. The main missing piece is explicit guidance on when to prefer this over sibling card tools, but for a card-rendering tool with modest complexity this is adequately complete.

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 only 40%, so the description should compensate for undocumented parameters. It adds useful semantics for the core 'tabs' parameter: tabs are different contexts of the same subject and can hold text, HTML, or code. However, it does not add meaning for title, subtitle, tutorTerms, or contextActions beyond what the schema already documents, so compensation is partial.

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 uses a specific verb ('Render') and resource ('interactive card with tabs'), and explains the organizing principle: tabs show different contexts of the same subject with examples like programming language, OS, or skill level. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling card tools such as create_table_card, create_chart_card, or create_video_card.

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 provides clear context for when this card is appropriate: when the user needs multiple perspectives on the same subject, e.g., one tab per language or OS. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the use case is specific enough for an agent to route correctly.

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