Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

api-evangelist

by com.apievangelist
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

get_area

Read-only

One topic area with its related-area graph resolved — walk the network from here.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugYesArea slug, as find_areas returns it, e.g. "agents".
contextNoOptional: why you are asking. One sentence — the task you are trying to complete, or what you expect to get back. Never included in the answer and never used to rank; it is read only when a result turns out to be wrong, which is when knowing the intent is what makes the report actionable.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / slug / description
      Added value: +"Area slug, as find_areas returns it, e.g. \"agents\"."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / context
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional: why you are asking. One sentence — the task you are trying to complete, or what you expect to get back. Never included in the answer and never used to rank; it is read only when a result turns out to be wrong, which is when knowing the intent is what makes the report actionable.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one real behavioral fact — that the related-area graph is resolved for you rather than returned as raw edges — but says nothing about graph depth, expansion limits, or response shape for a tool with no output schema.

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?

A single compact sentence with no filler, and the core scope (one area, graph resolved) is front-loaded before the usage hint. The trailing "walk the network from here" is mildly informal but still informative.

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 two-parameter read-only getter, the description conveys the essential return shape (area + related-area graph) despite there being no output schema. Missing details like graph depth or pagination are minor at this complexity level.

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 coverage is 100% and both parameters are well documented in the schema, including the cross-reference to find_areas for slug format. The description adds nothing about slug or the optional context parameter, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

"One topic area with its related-area graph resolved" names a specific resource and states the retrieval scope (area plus its related-area graph), which reads clearly against the list-oriented find_areas sibling. However, it never explicitly names find_areas or another sibling, so the differentiation is inferred from the verb rather than stated.

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?

"Walk the network from here" implies the tool is for graph exploration, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or named alternative (e.g. find_related, find_areas). The agent must infer that it fetches one area and its neighbors rather than, say, a filtered list.

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

All api-evangelist toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources