ClickHelp Published Docs MCP Server

Get Project

get_project

Read-onlyIdempotent

Gets detailed information about a specific project or publication. Project IDs are unique across the entire portal. Returns id, url (full URL with protocol and domain), parentId (null for projects, project ID for publications), title (name), visibility (Private/Public/Restricted), topicCount (number of topics), modifiedOn (ISO timestamp of the most recent topic modification, or the creation timestamp if there are no topics), type (Project/Publication), lang (language code, e.g. 'en-US'), and baseLangProjectId (base language project ID for translations). For projects, publications lists the publications made from the project. Translation projects have limited topic editing: only workflow fields (status, assignee, owner) can be changed on their topics. Publications are auto-generated read-only project copies - their content cannot be modified and any changes would be lost when the publication is regenerated.

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": {
      "projectId": "<projectId>"
    },
    "name": "get_project"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`projectId`	Yes	The project or publication ID (ExternalID). Project IDs are unique across the portal.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 11, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: project vs publication semantics, that publications are regenerated and any changes lost, and that translation projects restrict topic editing to workflow fields. It does not cover failure behavior for an unknown or malformed ID, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the long field enumeration earns its place because there is no output schema to document return values. However, entity-behavior details about publications and translations are packed into one dense run-on block that would be clearer as separated sentences.

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 single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description does the heavy lifting by enumerating every returned field, including the subtle parentId and modifiedOn fallback rules. Only the error/failure path for a bad ID is unaddressed, which is a minor omission given the tool's simplicity.

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?

With one parameter at 100% schema description coverage, the schema already carries the full parameter semantics. The description only restates that IDs are unique across the portal and clarifies the ID is an ExternalID-style identifier, which adds little beyond the schema text.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Gets detailed information about a specific project or publication') and even disambiguates the two entity types it can return. It stops short of explicitly routing against siblings like list_projects or get_topic, so an agent must infer the boundaries from tool names alone.

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?

Usage context is implied rather than stated: the description establishes that this is the lookup for a single known project/publication ID, and the note about publications being read-only hints at what results mean. There is no explicit 'use this when X, use list_projects when Y' guidance or statement of prerequisites such as how to obtain a projectId.

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

All ClickHelp Published Docs MCP Server 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?