BlackOps Center

Get Brain

get_brain

Read-only

Get the compiled knowledge map for a brain: a manifest of source notes with IDs and summaries — call get_note for a note's full content. Site-agnostic. Accepts a UUID, slug, name, or alias; no list_brains lookup needed first (call list_brains for a brain not named in your instructions). status: "pending" means it has never compiled — call update_brain to add the first note. To create a new brain, call create_brain. The response's pending_triage_count is how many items are held out of this compile awaiting a list_triage / promote_triage_item / dismiss_triage_item decision.

AMBIGUITY: when a reference matches more than one brain the response is error "ambiguous_brain_ref" with a candidate list and NO brain. Present the candidates to the user and ask which they mean. Do not infer from context, and do not re-call this tool until they answer.

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": "get_brain"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`brain_id`	No	Brain UUID
`brain_name`	No	Brain slug, name, or alias — how the user referred to it

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 8, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses important behavior: identifier flexibility without a prior lookup, the ambiguous_brain_ref error with candidate list and no brain returned, and the meaning of status 'pending' and pending_triage_count. This is exactly the context an agent needs to avoid misuse.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose and then packs alternatives, status behavior, and ambiguity handling into dense but useful sentences. Every sentence contributes actionable guidance, and the dedicated ambiguity paragraph improves structure.

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?

Although there is no output schema, the description explains the returned manifest, source note IDs and summaries, pending_triage_count, and the ambiguous_brain_ref error behavior. It also covers creation, listing, note retrieval, and update alternatives, making it complete for this read-only tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents brain_id and brain_name. The description adds meaningful routing semantics by saying it accepts a UUID, slug, name, or alias and that no list_brains lookup is needed first.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Get the compiled knowledge map for a brain: a manifest of source notes with IDs and summaries.' It also distinguishes this tool from siblings by directing note content requests to get_note and brain listings to list_brains.

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?

It gives explicit when-to-use guidance: call get_note for full note content, list_brains for a brain not named in instructions, update_brain when status is pending, and create_brain to create a new brain. It also handles the ambiguous-reference case with clear instructions to ask the user and not re-call.

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

All BlackOps Center tools Inspect

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

Need Help?