Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Easel

Easel

by nemodleo
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

place_board

Records a board’s canvas position, title, and page in board.json so newly created HTML screens can be named and arranged on Easel’s infinite canvas.

Instructions

Record a board's canvas position, title and page in board.json. Use it after creating a new screen to set its name and position.

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": {
      "file": "<file>"
    },
    "name": "place_board"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
xNo
yNo
fileYes
pageNo
titleNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It reveals the persistence target (board.json) and the sequencing after screen creation, but says nothing about overwrite behavior for an already-placed board, prerequisites such as the board existing, permissions, or error behavior for a mutation tool.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and persistence target, followed by the usage cue. No filler or repetition.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema and 0% schema coverage across five parameters, the description is too thin. It omits the required 'file' argument, overwrite semantics, and any mention of what the agent gets back or what happens on failure.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It maps 'canvas position', 'title' and 'page' to parameters, but leaves the only required parameter, 'file', entirely unexplained in both the schema and the description. That is a significant gap for a 5-parameter tool.

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?

States a specific verb ('Record') and resource ('board's canvas position, title and page in board.json'), which an agent can distinguish from create_board by the phrase 'after creating a new screen'. It is clear, though the differentiation from siblings like create_board is implied rather than explicit.

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?

Gives clear usage context: 'Use it after creating a new screen to set its name and position.' This tells the agent when to reach for it. It does not name when NOT to use it or name alternatives explicitly, so it falls short of the 5 level.

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