Skip to main content
Glama

find_sections

Find sections (stories) by TITLE. Exact words first (phrase, then AND-of-tokens); when NO title contains the words, falls back to MEANING matches in any language (hits carry match='meaning' + a cosine score — verify with get_section before relying on one). Each match includes first_citation and last_citation — ready-to-use canonical citations (e.g. 'M2:2608'). To read a whole multi-section story, call get_range with the FIRST match's first_citation as start and the LAST match's last_citation as end. Do NOT construct a citation from first_beyt_global — that is a GLOBAL index (1..25635), not a daftar-local beyt number. Example: find_sections('ابلیس معاویه', daftar=2).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
queryYesstory title words (Persian) or a description of the story in any language
daftarNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
noteNo
queryYes
totalYes
sectionsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / query / description
      Previous value: -"Persian text to match against section titles"New value: +"story title words (Persian) or a description of the story in any language"
    • addedOutput schema / $defs / SectionMatch / properties / match
      Added value: +{
      +  "anyOf": [
      +    {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    {
      +      "type": "null"
      +    }
      +  ],
      +  "default": null,
      +  "title": "Match"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / $defs / SectionMatch / properties / score
      Added value: +{
      +  "anyOf": [
      +    {
      +      "type": "number"
      +    },
      +    {
      +      "type": "null"
      +    }
      +  ],
      +  "default": null,
      +  "title": "Score"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / note
      Added value: +{
      +  "anyOf": [
      +    {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    {
      +      "type": "null"
      +    }
      +  ],
      +  "default": null,
      +  "title": "Note"
      +}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses the two-phase matching algorithm (exact phrase/AND-of-tokens, then meaning fallback), the match='meaning' flag with cosine score, the need for verification, and the distinction between global and daftar-local indices. This is rich behavioral context beyond the schema.

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 dense yet well-organized: purpose first, then matching behavior, citation usage, and a concrete example. Every sentence provides actionable information without filler, and the front-loading of the main purpose aids quick comprehension.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (two-tier matching, citation fields, global index pitfall) and the existence of an output schema, the description is impressively complete. It covers edge cases, verification, and cross-references get_range and get_section, making it self-sufficient for correct invocation.

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 only 33% (limit and daftar lack descriptions). The description compensates by thoroughly explaining query semantics (exact phrase, AND-of-tokens, meaning fallback) and showing daftar=2 in the example. However, limit is never addressed, though its schema defaults and bounds mitigate ambiguity.

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 begins with 'Find sections (stories) by TITLE', a specific verb+resource statement that clearly states the tool's core function. It differentiates from siblings by detailing exact-word matching first and meaning fallback, and includes a concrete example, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: use get_range with the first match's first_citation and last match's last_citation to read a full multi-section story, and verify meaning matches with get_section. It also warns against constructing citations from first_beyt_global, offering clear when-to and when-not-to instructions.

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.