Marcora

get_plan

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch a single plan by UUID including all linked parameters and metadata.

Input roles:
- plan_uuid: The UUID string from a create_plan response or a list_plans result. Use plan_uuid, not the integer id.

Usage patterns:
- **Always call get_plan before update_plan** to read current state and avoid overwriting fields with stale values.
- Use _produced_content to determine whether the plan has linked content (null = no content yet).
- Use _source_metadata_resolved for tooltip / inline attribution display without extra lookups.
- Before calling create_content with plan_id, verify the plan is NOT in Complete stage. If stage = Complete, ask the user whether to re-open the plan (update_plan target_stage: 'Accepted') before generating again.
- reference_documents is filtered to documents readable by the current user — do not assume the full list is returned if the team has cross-team sharing enabled.

Errors:
- NotFound — plan_uuid doesn't exist or is not visible to you. Cross-team plans return NotFound, not AccessDenied. A teammate's PRIVATE plan (visibility='private', you are neither creator nor assignee) also returns NotFound — do not retry.

**Links:** present `link_url` to the user exactly as returned — copy it character for character. Never retype, shorten, or rebuild a link or the IDs inside 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": {
      "plan_uuid": "<plan_uuid>"
    },
    "name": "get_plan"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`plan_uuid`	Yes	The UUID of the plan to fetch (use plan_uuid, not the integer id).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`plan`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 4, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already establish a safe read (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive), and the description adds substantial context beyond them: NotFound-vs-AccessDenied semantics for cross-team and private plans, an explicit "do not retry" instruction, and the fact that reference_documents is permission-filtered rather than complete. That permission-filtering caveat is exactly the kind of hidden behavior an agent cannot infer.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in sentence one and the remaining material is organized under labeled sections, so it scans well. It runs long, and the trailing link-formatting rule is presentation guidance rather than tool-selection guidance, which slightly dilutes focus.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value documentation is correctly omitted; the description instead covers what the schema cannot — error taxonomy, filtered fields, and cross-tool workflow constraints. Nothing an agent needs in order to call this correctly or interpret its result appears to be missing.

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 coverage is 100% and the single parameter is fully documented, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description's note that the UUID comes from a create_plan response or a list_plans result adds provenance but largely restates the schema's "use plan_uuid, not the integer id".

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?

"Fetch a single plan by UUID including all linked parameters and metadata" names a specific verb (fetch), resource (plan), selector (UUID), and scope of payload. It is immediately distinguishable from list_plans and from the mutation sibling update_plan.

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 rules ("Always call get_plan before update_plan") and a concrete pre-condition for a different sibling ("Before calling create_content with plan_id, verify the plan is NOT in Complete stage"), including the remediation step. It also tells the agent how to interpret specific response fields, which is guidance no schema can carry.

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

All Marcora 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?