Skip to main content
Glama

query_limviddmreport

Read-only

Find LimVidDmReport 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_limviddmreport"
  }
}

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

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The readOnlyHint=true annotation already establishes the safe-read profile, so the description's burden is lower. The description adds the return-cardinality distinction (one record vs a list), but says nothing about pagination behavior, result caps, or what happens when neither id nor query is supplied.

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?

A single sentence with zero waste, front-loading the resource and then the two usage modes. Nothing in it is redundant filler.

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, nested-query read tool with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate: the schema carries parameter detail and the annotation carries safety. It leaves unstated how id and query interact if both are passed, and gives no sense of result shape beyond cardinality.

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 83%, so the schema already documents id, skip, sort, limit, query, and fields with examples and defaults. The description only restates the id-vs-query split and adds no format or interaction detail beyond the structured fields, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 names a specific verb ('Find') and resource ('LimVidDmReport records') and distinguishes the two operating modes: single-record lookup via id versus filtered list via query. It does not differentiate itself from the many sibling query_lim* tools, so an agent must still infer that this targets the LimVidDmReport entity specifically.

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 implied routing guidance — use id for one record, query for a filtered list — which is enough to pick a mode. It does not state when to prefer this tool over sibling query tools, nor any prerequisites or 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