Skip to main content
Glama

query_limpartnerevent

Read-only

Find LimPartnerEvent 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_limpartnerevent"
  }
}

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

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes that this is a safe read operation, and the description adds only the single-vs-list retrieval mode. It does not disclose return shape, authorization requirements, rate limits, or query error behavior beyond what the annotations and schema already provide.

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?

It is a single sentence, front-loaded with the operation and followed by the two retrieval modes. There is no filler or repetition.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a six-parameter query tool with a nested query object and no output schema, the description covers the essential id-vs-query fork. It leaves the returned record shape and overall pagination behavior unstated, relying on the input schema descriptions for skip, sort, limit, and fields.

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 baseline is 3. The description mentions only id and query, adding no meaning beyond the schema's own id description ('omit to query many') or query description ('MongoDB-style filter').

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 clear verb ('Find') and resource ('LimPartnerEvent records'), and distinguishes the single-record path ('pass id') from the filtered-list path ('query'). It does not name any sibling query tool, though the resource-specific name already sets it apart from the other query_lim* tools.

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 gives concrete mode-selection guidance: use id for one record, query for a filtered list. It does not state when to prefer this tool over other query tools or explain pagination/sorting choices, which are left to the schema.

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