Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
diagonaldiagrams

diagonaldiagrams

by lucas19919
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Compare two drawings

diff
Read-onlyIdempotent

Compare two SVG or HTML drawings to report added, removed, renamed, moved, reordered, and recolored items, confirming that an edit produced the intended change.

Instructions

Say what changed between two drawings of the same figure (.svg or .html): items added, removed, renamed, moved, reordered or recolored, as JSON and plain sentences. Read-only. Use it after apply or an edit to confirm the change did what you meant.

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": {
      "old": "<old>",
      "new": "<new>"
    },
    "name": "diff"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
newYesThe later drawing (.svg or .html).
oldYesThe earlier drawing (.svg or .html).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.9.1

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and closed-world behavior. The description adds useful context beyond those annotations: it says results are JSON and plain sentences and lists the change categories detected (added, removed, renamed, moved, reordered, recolored). It repeats the read-only trait and does not fully detail the return structure, but it still adds meaningful behavioral information.

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 two sentences and is front-loaded with purpose and scope before the usage guidance. Every sentence contributes useful information with no wasted wording.

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?

For a simple two-parameter, read-only diff tool with no output schema, the description states the inputs, supported file types, output forms, and intended workflow. Return structure could be more explicit, but it is largely complete for this tool's complexity.

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%, and the schema already documents 'old' as the earlier drawing and 'new' as the later drawing. The description adds only the 'same figure' constraint and supported formats (.svg or .html), not parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries parameter documentation.

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 phrase ('Say what changed') and resource ('two drawings of the same figure'). It also enumerates the kinds of changes detected, so an agent can distinguish this diff operation from siblings like describe, validate, or audit.

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?

It gives clear usage context: use after apply or an edit to confirm the change did what was intended, explicitly naming the apply sibling. It does not provide explicit when-not guidance or compare itself to validate/audit alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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