Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

api-evangelist

by com.apievangelist
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

get_conversation

Read-only

One conversation with guest detail and media links; include=["content"] returns the writeup.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugYesConversation slug — date-prefixed, as find_conversations returns it, e.g. "2026-09-01-lukasz-gornicki".
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.
includeNoPass ["content"] to inline the full body (Pro). Omitted, you get the summary.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / include / description
      Added value: +"Pass [\"content\"] to inline the full body (Pro). Omitted, you get the summary."
    • addedInput schema / properties / slug / description
      Added value: +"Conversation slug — date-prefixed, as find_conversations returns it, e.g. \"2026-09-01-lukasz-gornicki\"."
  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

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false already tell the agent this is a safe, closed read, so the description is not carrying the safety burden. What it adds — that the default response is a summary and include=["content"] inlines the full writeup — is real behavioral information, but it duplicates schema content rather than extending it.

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 semicolon-joined sentence with zero filler, and the return-shape clause is front-loaded before the option flag. It is efficient, though the terseness trades away guidance the agent would need.

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?

With no output schema and full schema coverage on three simple parameters, the description covers what an agent needs: the resource, the default versus expanded response, and the presence of guest/media subfields. Missing sibling routing is a usage-guidelines concern rather than a completeness gap for a single-record lookup.

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 100%, so all three parameters (slug, context, include) are already documented in the schema, including the enum and the Pro-gated content mode. The description restates the include behavior rather than adding syntax or edge-case detail, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 the resource precisely and states what the payload contains — one conversation plus guest detail and media links, with an optional full-body mode. It omits an explicit verb and never names find_conversations as the collection-level sibling, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no stated precondition, and no routing to an alternative. The only hint of context is indirect: the slug schema description points at find_conversations, which the description itself never leverages.

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
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources