Stonewake

Fetch

fetch

Read-onlyIdempotent

One company as a single document, by the id a search result carries (node:, the same number the node_id tools take). The text is assembled by fixed rules from the caller team's stored data: identity and register identifiers, the current risk assessment with its signals, register events, reported financial figures and the nearest register relations, each row with its source link. metadata lists the identifiers and the source links. Nothing is researched, scored or generated at call time. A long record is cut at the output limit and says so in its last line; the company tools serve each part in full.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "fetch"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	The id of a search result, node:<number>.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`url`	Yes
`text`	Yes
`title`	Yes
`metadata`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 4, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), it discloses that content is assembled by fixed rules from stored team data and that 'nothing is researched, scored or generated at call time' — a meaningful determinism/freshness guarantee. It also describes truncation behavior at the output limit, the last-line marker, and what metadata contains.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and input source, then the assembly rules, then the truncation caveat — a sensible order. The middle sentence enumerating record sections is long but earns its place by telling the agent what will come back; overall length is proportionate to the tool's data-density.

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-only single-record document tool with an output schema, this covers everything an agent needs: input provenance, deterministic assembly, record contents, metadata contents, and behavior under size limits. Nothing material is left for the agent to guess.

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?

With one parameter at 100% schema coverage the schema already carries the definition, but the description adds cross-tool meaning: the id is 'node:<number>', the same number the node_id tools take, which tells the agent where the value comes from. It does not, however, say what happens on a malformed or unknown id.

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 states a concrete verb and resource: pull one company as a single assembled document by its node id. It also distinguishes itself from the company_* siblings with the closing line 'the company tools serve each part in full', though that differentiation is a single oblique clause rather than a crisp contrast.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It establishes the input prerequisite clearly ('by the id a search result carries') and names the alternative path when the record is truncated ('the company tools serve each part in full'). What it lacks is an explicit statement of when NOT to use it, e.g. when only one section such as financials or events is needed.

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

All Stonewake 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?