Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Onda MCP

Onda MCP

by mindfullabai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

onda_workspace_tile

Set the workspace tiling layout to single, split-horizontal, split-vertical, or quad to control how workspaces are arranged in the main window.

Instructions

Set the workspace-level tiling layout. Controls how workspaces are arranged in the main window.

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": {
      "layout": "<layout>"
    },
    "name": "onda_workspace_tile"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
layoutYesLayout mode: single (one workspace), split-h (horizontal split), split-v (vertical split), quad (four quadrants).
workspaceIdNoWorkspace ID. Omit to use active workspace.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.2

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It states the high-level effect but does not disclose any behavioral details such as side effects, whether it rearranges existing panes, or any prerequisites. 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.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise, with two short sentences and no redundant wording. It is well-structured, though it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple setter tool with a small schema, the description covers the basic purpose but lacks context about what happens when 'workspaceId' is omitted and does not address the potential overlap with the sibling 'onda_workspace_layout'. Adequate but with gaps.

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?

The input schema provides 100% coverage with clear descriptions for both parameters, including the enum values for 'layout'. The description does not add any parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the action ('Set the workspace-level tiling layout') and the resource, but does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'onda_workspace_layout', which may be a similar or alternative operation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'onda_workspace_layout'. The description implies a use case (setting tiling layout) but offers no explicit context, exclusions, or prerequisites.

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