Skip to main content
Glama
wiktorekdev

nuvio-mcp

by wiktorekdev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Copy settings between profiles/platforms

nuvio_copy_settings

Copy settings from one profile to another by replacing the target's settings blob. Supports dry-run and snapshots previous state for revert. Deprecated: use nuvio_copy_setup.

Instructions

[DEPRECATED] Use nuvio_copy_setup instead. Replace the target's settings blob with a copy of the source's. Supports dry_run and snapshots the previous state before the write; revert with nuvio_undo.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dry_runNoReturn the diff without writing anything (no snapshot, no audit entry).
to_platformNotv
from_platformNotv
to_profile_idNo
from_profile_idNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.1.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / dry_run
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Return the diff without writing anything (no snapshot, no audit entry).",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / from_platform / description
      Removed value: -"Platform namespace: tv | mobile | desktop | web"
    • removedInput schema / properties / to_platform / description
      Removed value: -"Platform namespace: tv | mobile | desktop | web"
  2. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description discloses that it replaces the target's settings blob (a write), supports dry_run to avoid writes, snapshots prior state, and allows revert via nuvio_undo. This goes beyond the annotations (which only indicate readOnlyHint false, destructiveHint false) by explaining the safety net, which is essential for an agent to gauge risk. No contradiction with annotations is present.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the deprecation notice, and covers the core behavior in a compact manner. It is efficient with no fluff, though it could be slightly better structured by separating the deprecation note from the functional details.

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?

For a deprecated tool, the description provides enough to understand its function, safety (dry_run, snapshot), and the recommended alternative. However, it does not explain all five parameters in detail or cover edge cases like same source/target, and since it's deprecated, the lack of full detail is somewhat acceptable but still leaves gaps for an agent that might use it.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With only 20% schema description coverage (only dry_run described), the description adds minimal parameter context. It uses 'source' and 'target' implicitly mapping to from_* and to_* parameters, but does not explain defaults, constraints, or parameter interactions. The parameter names are self-descriptive, but the description does not compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 action: 'copy settings between profiles/platforms' and specifies it 'Replace the target's settings blob with a copy of the source's.' It also distinguishes itself from the sibling nuvio_copy_setup by marking itself deprecated and naming the replacement, making its purpose unmistakable.

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?

It explicitly says '[DEPRECATED] Use nuvio_copy_setup instead,' which is direct guidance on when not to use this tool and which alternative to choose. It also mentions dry_run and snapshot/revert capabilities, offering practical usage context, though it doesn't elaborate on broader conditions for copying vs other update operations.

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