Rillsoft Project MCP server

Official

by rillsoft

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

JavaScript

Local

Close property sheet

rillsoft_property_panel_close

Read-onlyIdempotent

Switches the Rillsoft Project property sheet back to the info sheet; if the info sheet is already open, it takes no action and reports no error.

Instructions

Switches the property sheet back to the info sheet. Where the info sheet is open already it does nothing, and that is not an error. No undo step, no change to the project. It answers like rillsoft_property_panel_get.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	name of the shown element; missing when there is none
`type`	Yes	kind of the open property sheet; 'other' for an unknown one
`uuid`	No	UUID of the shown element; missing when there is none
`number`	No	number of the shown element; missing when there is none
`activeTab`	No	the tab in front; missing when no property sheet is open
`availableTabs`	Yes	names of all tabs of the open property sheet
`infoPanelVisible`	Yes	true = the docking bar is visible

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv10.0.626Oct 17, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Adds meaningful behavior beyond annotations: idempotent no-op is not an error, no undo step, no project change, and echoes rillsoft_property_panel_get response. This fills gaps annotations don't cover (undo behavior, error semantics).

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the main action, then behavioral caveats. No waste.

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?

Output schema exists and annotations cover safety/idempotency; description adds undo and no-op semantics and return-shape pointer. Complete enough for a parameterless toggle.

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?

Zero parameters, so baseline 4 applies. No param info needed.

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?

Specific verb ('Switches') and resource ('property sheet back to the info sheet'). Clear what it does, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling rillsoft_property_panel_open or rillsoft_resource_pool_edit_close, but the name/description pairing is sufficiently distinct.

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?

Implies when to use (to return from property sheet to info sheet) and states the no-op case 'where the info sheet is open already it does nothing'. No explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use guidance vs sibling tools.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server