Skip to main content
Glama

export_architecture_diagram

Export system architecture, code lineage, or CQRS diagrams from a knowledge graph as Mermaid or C4, with optional project, workspace, and library filters.

Instructions

Export Mermaid or C4 system architecture diagrams from the knowledge graph.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "export_architecture_diagram"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeNoType: 'architecture', 'lineage', 'cqrs'. Default: 'architecture'.architecture
formatNoFormat: 'mermaid' or 'c4'. Default: 'mermaid'.mermaid
projectNoOptional project filter.
workspacePathNoOptional workspace root path.
includeLibrariesNoInclude shared libraries. Default: false.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.80.5

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Export' is ambiguous: it doesn't say whether a file is written to disk (and where), or whether diagram source text is returned, nor whether the operation is read-only or has side effects. None of that behavior is disclosed.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, so nothing is wasted. It is efficient but arguably too thin for a five-parameter tool, which is a completeness issue rather than a verbosity one.

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?

The tool has five parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, so the description must explain the result of an export — where the diagram goes and what is returned — and it does not. It also omits the lineage and cqrs diagram types and any mention of what includeLibraries changes in the output.

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 100%, so every parameter (type, format, project, workspacePath, includeLibraries) is already documented, and the description adds no meaning beyond restating the mermaid/c4 formats. Baseline 3 is correct when the schema does the work.

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 and resource: 'Export Mermaid or C4 system architecture diagrams from the knowledge graph.' However, it only names output formats and never mentions that it also exports lineage and CQRS diagrams (per the schema), and it does nothing to separate itself from the get_architecture_map / get_architecture_overview / get_architecture_view siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No when-to-use guidance at all. With three closely named architecture-view siblings, an agent gets no signal about when to export a diagram versus fetching a map, overview, or view, and no prerequisites or exclusions are stated.

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