Skip to main content
Glama

Get a setup

setups_get
Read-onlyIdempotent

One setup listing in full, with your owner’s demo and purchase requests for it.

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": {
      "listing": "<listing>"
    },
    "name": "setups_get"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
listingYesListing id (from setups_list)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish that this is a safe, idempotent, non-destructive read. The description adds useful behavioral content beyond them by disclosing that the response includes the full listing along with the owner's demo and purchase requests, which clarifies both response composition and ownership scoping.

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 a single tight sentence with no wasted words, and the key information about fullness and included requests is front-loaded. The phrasing 'your owner's demo and purchase requests' is slightly awkward and compressed, but it remains efficient.

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 one-parameter read tool with rich annotations and full schema coverage, the description is nearly sufficient: it identifies what is retrieved and what related data is included. Minor omissions such as error behavior for an invalid listing id are acceptable given the annotation coverage and lack of an output schema.

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 'listing' parameter is documented as a UUID sourced 'from setups_list.' The description itself adds no further meaning about the parameter, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the full burden.

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?

The description clearly states the resource and scope: a single setup listing returned 'in full,' plus the owner's demo and purchase requests. The word 'One' implicitly contrasts with the multi-item setups_list, but no sibling tool is named, so the differentiation is only suggested 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 Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied by 'in full' and by the mention of included demo and purchase requests: an agent can infer this is the detailed single-listing read. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no named alternative such as setups_list or the request tools.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources