Skip to main content
Glama
piers-fawkes

Fodda Context Layer

by piers-fawkes
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

generate_visual

Read-onlyIdempotent

Create presentation-ready charts from research findings. Pick from six chart types like cultural shifts or opportunity map; returns branded SVG that renders in chat.

Instructions

Create a presentation-ready data visualization from research findings. Available chart types: "cultural_shifts" (From→To transitions), "competitive_compass" (brands on 2 axes), "trend_constellation" (network of related trends), "implication_ladder" (Signal→Trend→So What→Do What), "innovation_pathway" (Now→Near-Term→Future), "opportunity_map" (2×2 white space analysis). Returns a branded SVG that renders directly in the chat. (Data payload transformation + SVG chart rendering.)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesJSON string containing chart data. Optional top-level "focus":"Name" or per-item "focus":true highlights key entity in brand accent. cultural_shifts: {shifts:[{from,to}]}. competitive_compass: {brands:[{name,x,y,focus?:boolean}], axes:{left,right,top,bottom}, focus?:string}. trend_constellation: {trends:[{name,x,y,focus?:boolean}], connections:[{from,to,strength}], focus?:string}. implication_ladder: {signal,trend,so_what,do_what}. innovation_pathway: {now,near_term,future}. opportunity_map: {items:[{name,consumer_desire,market_activity,focus?:boolean}], x_label?:string, y_label?:string, focus?:string}
chart_typeYesThe type of visualization to generate

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.3.3

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable non-annotation context: it returns a branded SVG that renders directly in chat and performs data payload transformation plus SVG rendering. It stops short of noting rate limits or auth needs.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then a compact chart-type catalog, then the return value. Every clause earns its place; the trailing parenthetical about internal mechanics is the only slightly redundant element.

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?

With only two fully-documented required parameters and no output schema, the description supplies the missing return-value information (SVG rendered in chat) and the chart-type semantics. It lacks only edge-case guidance (e.g., malformed data handling).

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 coverage is 100% (baseline 3), but the description adds meaning beyond the raw enum by explaining what each chart_type represents (From→To transitions, 2×2 white space, etc.), which directly helps the agent pick a value and shape the data payload.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Create a presentation-ready data visualization from research findings') and then enumerates all six supported chart types with one-line semantic glosses. No sibling tool offers visualization, so an agent can immediately place it.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The phrase 'from research findings' implies the context in which to reach for it, and the chart-type glossary helps select the right variant. However, it never states when to use this versus siblings or any prerequisites/exclusions, leaving usage to inference.

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