Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Argorant

by com.argorant
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Open a search result

fetch
Read-onlyIdempotent

Open one result id from search and show how many people match, with up to five example rows of job and company, names hidden. Use it only on ids that search returned. For example people of a filtered search, call argorant_preview_people instead. It shows no contact details and costs no credits. Each fetch counts as one count and one preview toward the free daily safety limits. More in the docs at https://docs.argorant.com/docs/agents/tools#read-and-preview

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

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

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesA result id from the search answer.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, closed-world and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description goes beyond that with genuinely useful cost/limit behavior: no contact details returned, no credits charged, but each call consumes one count and one preview against the free daily safety limits, plus a docs link for depth. Only the example-row truncation semantics (what happens when more than five match) is left implicit.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose and return shape, then constraints, then cost, then docs — a sensible ordering with little waste. The phrase "For example people of a filtered search" is slightly garbled and forces a re-read of the key routing rule, which is the one flaw in an otherwise tight description.

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?

For a single-id read tool with a full annotation set and an output schema, this covers everything an agent needs: where ids come from, what comes back, what is withheld, which sibling to use instead, and the quota cost per call.

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?

Only one parameter exists and schema coverage is 100%, with the schema itself saying "A result id from the search answer." The description's "use it only on ids that search returned" restates that provenance rule as a hard constraint rather than adding new format or semantics, so the schema is doing the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ("Open one result id from search") and immediately specifies the payload: match count plus up to five example rows of job and company with names hidden. The contrast with argorant_preview_people makes it distinguishable from the nearest sibling without opening either schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives an explicit precondition ("Use it only on ids that search returned") and routes the agent to the alternative, argorant_preview_people, for sample people of a filtered search. Both the when and the when-not are stated rather than implied.

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

All Argorant toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources