AthenaHQ

get_brand_kit

Read-only

Read a brand kit as the Brand Profile editor shows it, to inspect or change it: the draft name, the eight guidance fields as text (voice is the writing direction), voice settings (1-5 or auto), tone traits, the kit's writing rules with ids, and the website's global writing rules with ids, plus draft and published versions. Omit kit_id for the website's default kit; available_kits lists every kit. Content generation uses a kit's published version, so has_unpublished_changes means the draft differs from it. Guidance fields longer than the clip come back shortened and listed in truncated_fields; pass fields to read those whole, which update_brand_kit's find needs. Rules are clipped too, each with its own truncated flag. Call this before update_brand_kit. To write in the brand's voice, read brandKit__get instead. Read-only.

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": {
      "website_id": "<website_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_brand_kit"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`fields`	No	Guidance fields to return whole (up to 12,000 characters) instead of clipped at 4,000. Needed before a find edit on a clipped field.
`kit_id`	No	The brand kit to read. Omit it for the website's default kit; available_kits lists every kit.
`website_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`kit`	No
`truncated`	No
`global_rules`	No
`can_use_rules`	No
`available_kits`	No
`global_version`	No
`truncated_fields`	No
`rules_unavailable`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/openWorldHint/destructiveHint, and the description still adds substantial non-obvious behavior: clipping at 4,000 characters with truncated_fields, per-rule truncation flags, and the crucial semantic that content generation uses the published version so has_unpublished_changes signals draft drift. These are exactly the traits an agent cannot infer from annotations.

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 critical routing and sequencing statements are front-loaded, and the clipping rules are grouped logically after the return-shape enumeration. It is a dense single block with some restatement (truncation explained twice for guidance fields and rules), but nearly every sentence carries operational information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a read tool with three parameters, an output schema, and rich annotations, the description covers the remaining gaps: version semantics, truncation behavior, default-kit resolution, and the workflow dependency on update_brand_kit. An agent has everything needed to call it and interpret the result correctly.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 67%, and the description compensates by explaining kit_id's default-kit fallback, the fields allow-list purpose (return whole up to 12,000 instead of clipped, required before a find edit), and the field semantics such as voice being the writing direction. Much of this overlaps the schema's own parameter descriptions, which caps it below 5.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource ("Read a brand kit as the Brand Profile editor shows it") and enumerates exactly what comes back: draft name, eight guidance fields, voice settings, tone traits, writing rules with ids, and draft/published versions. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from update_brand_kit and brandKit__get, so an agent can route correctly without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives explicit sequencing ("Call this before update_brand_kit"), a named alternative for a different need ("To write in the brand's voice, read brandKit__get instead"), and the omission rule for kit_id with available_kits as the discovery path. It also states the conditional case for passing fields (clipped guidance needed for a find edit), which is when-to-use guidance at parameter granularity.

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

All AthenaHQ tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?