excalidraw-mcp-obsidian

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

batch_create_elements

Create multiple Excalidraw elements in one batch operation, applying design rules from the diagram guide for consistent colors and shapes.

Instructions

Create multiple Excalidraw elements at once. ⚠️ BEFORE using this tool, call read_diagram_guide(template="...") to get design rules (colors, shapes, line types, anti-patterns).

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": {
      "elements": "<elements>"
    },
    "name": "batch_create_elements"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`elements`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 12, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the batch nature and prerequisite, but does not disclose potential side effects, validation behavior, failure handling, or response format. For a batch mutation tool, this is a significant transparency gap.

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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and includes a concise warning. Every sentence provides value with no filler or redundancy.

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 a complex schema (17 properties per element object) and no output schema or annotations, yet the description is minimal. It provides a design-rule prerequisite but does not explain return values, error semantics, or how the schema fields interconnect, leaving significant context gaps.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no semantic information about the 'elements' parameter or its nested properties. It only restates the concept of creating elements without explaining field meanings, defaults, or required behaviors.

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 ('Create') and resource ('multiple Excalidraw elements at once'), distinguishing it from the sibling tool 'create_element' (singular). The scope is explicit and unambiguous.

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 provides a clear prerequisite: 'BEFORE using this tool, call read_diagram_guide(template="...")' to obtain design rules. This offers a procedural guideline, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios, so it falls short of a 5.

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