Skip to main content
Glama

data_url

Return the web URL of a datastore, for the user to open it. url is null when this account's product has no table page — url_absente then says why; the table still exists. datastore accepts slot:<name> (active project). With filter/q/order_by (as in data_rows), the URL opens that filtered, sorted view — a shareable link — and count = the rows it shows.

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": {
      "datastore": "<datastore>"
    },
    "name": "data_url"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qNo
_orgNoOrg (id) de CET APPEL. `oto_list_orgs()`.
_groupNoÉquipe (id) de CET APPEL, sous son org parente.
filterNo
_run_idNoOBLIGATOIRE à chaque appel dès `run_start` ou `data_claim_next` : sans lui, l'écriture sur une ligne réservée est refusée. Hérité seulement si le serveur tient un run actif — n'y compte pas.
_projectNoProjet (id) de CET APPEL — jeton PRIMAIRE. `oto_project(op='list')`.
order_byNo
datastoreYes
order_dirNodesc

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

No schema history has been recorded yet.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose non-obvious behavior: url can be null while the table still exists, url_absente explains why, and count reports the rows shown by the URL. It omits that the call is non-mutating/safe and doesn't enumerate the full return object, but the key edge case is covered.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the return value, then the null case, then the parameter semantics. No filler; each clause adds information an agent needs.

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 9-parameter tool with no output schema, the description supplies the return shape (url, url_absente, count), the null edge case, and the meaning of the view-shaping parameters. That is enough for correct invocation without further documentation.

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 44%, and the description compensates well for the undocumented ones: it explains that datastore accepts the 'slot:<name>' form (active project), and that filter/q/order_by mirror data_rows and change what the URL opens. order_dir and the _org/_group/_project/_run_id context params are left to the schema.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Return the web URL of a datastore', and immediately scopes the consumer ('for the user to open it'). It also implicitly separates itself from data_rows by borrowing that tool's filter semantics, so an agent can tell what this tool produces versus a data-fetching sibling.

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?

It gives a use case ('for the user to open it', 'a shareable link') and explains a conditional behavior for filtered URLs, but never states when to choose this over data_rows, data_share, or data_list_datastores. Usage is implied rather than prescribed, and there are no exclusions.

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