Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

LinkGents

by ai.linkgents
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get ticket

get_ticket
Read-onlyIdempotent

One ticket in full: body, acceptance criteria, evidence, the planning docs (plan, risks, qa_steps) and its history.

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": {
      "ticket": "<ticket>"
    },
    "name": "get_ticket"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ticketYesTicket key such as "LG-12" (or its id)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description's contribution is listing the returned content sections, which is genuinely additive given there is no output schema, but it says nothing about behavior for a missing or invalid ticket key.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with a tight colon-separated inventory of contents; every clause carries information and nothing is redundant.

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?

For a simple single-parameter read with no output schema, the description adequately conveys what comes back and the annotations cover safety and idempotency. Only lookup-failure behavior is left unstated, which is a minor gap.

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% and the single parameter documents the key format ("LG-12" or its id), so the description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

"One ticket in full" states a specific verb (fetch) and resource (a single ticket), and the enumeration of returned sections (body, acceptance criteria, evidence, planning docs, history) makes clear this is the detail view rather than a list. It does not name a sibling, so differentiation is implied rather than explicit.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no alternative is named. The phrase "one ticket in full" faintly implies this is the single-record lookup versus a board/list tool, but the agent must infer that from wording alone.

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

All LinkGents toolsInspect
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