Skip to main content
Glama

query_limncaooscard

Read-only

Find LimNcaoosCard records - pass id for one record, or query for a filtered list.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "query_limncaooscard"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoFetch one record by id; omit to query many
skipNoRecords to skip before the first result; 0 or more.
sortNoSort field; '-' prefix for descending
limitNo1-500; defaults to 50. Out-of-range values are clamped.
queryNoMongoDB-style filter, e.g. {"status": "active"}
fieldsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds mode behavior—single record versus filtered list—but does not describe return shape, pagination behavior, or any auth/rate-limit context.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with zero waste, immediately conveying the resource and the two main invocation modes.

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 read-only query tool with 83% schema description coverage and no output schema, the description is largely complete: it explains the id-versus-query choice. Minor gaps remain around the undocumented 'fields' parameter and broader pagination behavior, but the schema carries most of the burden.

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 high at 83%, so the schema already documents most parameters, including examples for query and constraints for limit. The description reinforces the id versus query distinction but adds no syntax or semantics beyond the schema, matching the baseline for high coverage.

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 uses a clear verb ('Find') and specific resource ('LimNcaoosCard records'), and it distinguishes the two operating modes: single-record lookup by id versus filtered list via query. It does not explicitly differentiate this tool from the many sibling query_lim* tools beyond the resource name, so it falls short of a 5.

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 states the basic usage conditions: pass 'id' for one record, or 'query' for a filtered list. However, it gives no guidance on when to prefer this tool over sibling query tools, no exclusions, and no prerequisites or pagination context.

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