Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
QGIS MCP

QGIS MCP

by lefcgis
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Set Layer Style

set_layer_style

Apply symbology to a QGIS layer: single symbol, categorized unique values, or graduated numeric ranges. Set field, color ramp, and class count for thematic mapping.

Instructions

Set symbology. style_type: 'single' (one symbol), 'categorized' (unique values), 'graduated' (numeric ranges). field required for categorized/graduated. color_ramp: QGIS ramp name (e.g. 'Spectral', 'Viridis', 'Blues'). classes: graduated class count (default 5).

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": {
      "layer_id": "<layer_id>",
      "style_type": "<style_type>"
    },
    "name": "set_layer_style"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fieldNo
classesNo
layer_idYes
color_rampNoSpectral
style_typeYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.5.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description must fully disclose behavior. It only states 'Set symbology' without detailing side effects (e.g., overrides existing style) or prerequisites (e.g., layer must be loaded). Minimal transparency.

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?

Extremely concise, front-loaded with the main action, and uses a list format for parameters. Every sentence adds useful information without redundancy.

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?

Covers key parameters and style types adequately for a symbology tool. Missing context about return value (since no output schema) and confirmation of success, but overall sufficient.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema covers 0% of parameter meanings; description adds meaning by explaining style_type options, field requirement, color_ramp names, and classes default. Adds significant value beyond schema.

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 'Set symbology' and distinguishes three style types ('single', 'categorized', 'graduated') with required parameters, differentiating it from sibling tools like set_layer_crs or set_layer_visibility.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use each style_type (e.g., 'field required for categorized/graduated') and default values for classes, but does not mention alternatives or when not to use this tool.

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