Skip to main content
Glama

Plan a Slide - Form + Variant Candidates

plan_slide
Read-onlyIdempotent

Send a brief to get ranked slide candidates and a verdict on routing and input readiness for slide creation.

Instructions

Plan before rendering: send a short brief, get ranked candidates + a separated verdict — route (which slide: selected|needs_confirmation|ambiguous), input (can it render: ready|extractable_from_brief|needs_structured_data) and next_action. Free (one embedding). Then call create_slide with the chosen form(+variant). route.confidence: calibrated = measured P(route correct) with label high/medium/low cut on it; retrieval_score/retrieval_margin = the raw family-aggregated classifier values (not probabilities; margin can be negative when families contest); source = classifier | structural_router (LLM-rescued). candidate_margin on the top candidate = literal gap between the two shown scores.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
topNo
briefYes
escalateNoDefault true: on a low-confidence route the plan runs the SAME LLM rescue create_slide would (small COGS on that tail only), so plan and create always agree. Set false for a classifier-only, fully free plan (response then flags will_escalate + create_slide_behavior).
variant_policyNoproduction_safe: if the top routed variant is draft/beta, the family's demo-safe sibling leads and route reports both best_semantic and best_production_safe.
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds detailed behavioral context: explains output fields (route, confidence, retrieval_score, etc.), the effect of escalate on LLM rescue, and cost implications ('Free (one embedding)'). No contradictions.

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 front-loaded with the core action and provides detailed technical information about output fields. While dense, each sentence adds value. Slightly verbose but still efficient for the complexity.

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?

The description explains output structure and key parameters but misses the 'top' parameter and does not fully describe the return format of candidates (no output schema). Error handling or edge cases are not addressed. Could be more complete.

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 description coverage is 50%. The description adds meaning for escalate and variant_policy but does not explain the 'top' parameter. The brief parameter is implied but lacks explicit validation guidance. More detail on all parameters would improve semantics.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Plan before rendering: send a short brief, get ranked candidates + a separated verdict'. It distinguishes from siblings by explicitly directing to call create_slide afterwards, showing it is a planning step.

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?

The description implies usage before rendering and provides context like 'Free (one embedding)' and the escalate parameter's effect. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool versus alternatives, such as browse_catalog.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/smartdatabrokers/slideforge-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server