Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
svg-annotate-mcp

svg-annotate-mcp

by sunjianbo-123
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

set_status

Display a status message on the annotation page to inform users of ongoing work, such as editing files and rerunning scripts.

Instructions

向批注页面顶栏推送一条状态文字,如「正在修改 fig_xxx.py 并重跑…」。

修改开始前调用一次,能让用户知道 Claude 正在干活;改完文件后
页面会因文件变化自动刷新,无需再调用本工具通知。

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": {
      "message": "<message>"
    },
    "name": "set_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
messageYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

无任何注释，描述须独立承担行为披露责任。它说明了推送状态文字的行为，并解释了自动刷新机制导致无需再次调用，提供了基本行为上下文。但未说明消息的显示时长、是否覆盖旧消息、失败处理等细节，行为透明度有限。

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?

描述仅两句话：第一句明确动作并给出示例，第二句补充使用时机和自动刷新逻辑。内容紧凑、无冗余，关键信息前置，结构合理，是一份高效规范。

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?

工具简单（单参数，无输出模式），描述涵盖了用途、时机和副作用（自动刷新的自解释）。虽然没有详细的行为细节（如消息清除方式），但鉴于工具的简单性，描述已足够让代理正确调用。

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?

输入模式中message参数仅有标题“Message”，无描述，schema描述覆盖率为0%。描述通过示例「正在修改 fig_xxx.py 并重跑…」暗示了参数应包含的文本内容，这为代理提供了有用的语义补充，但未明确参数格式、长度限制或是否必须为字符串，补偿不完整。

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?

描述明确说明工具是“向批注页面顶栏推送一条状态文字”，并给出具体示例「正在修改 fig_xxx.py 并重跑…」。动词和资源明确，与兄弟工具（open_svg、wait_for_annotations、get_annotations）功能截然不同，区分度高。

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?

描述给出了明确的使用时机：“修改开始前调用一次”，以及何时不使用：“改完文件后页面会因文件变化自动刷新,无需再调用本工具通知”。这提供了清晰的when和when-not，但没有提及替代工具（尽管兄弟工具功能不同，不需要排除）。

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