Skip to main content
Glama

Get Durable Project (Summary Only)

project_get
Read-only

Retrieve summary metadata for a durable house project you own -- title, project type, current version number, schema/archive revision, created/updated timestamps, and the content hash of the requested version. Requires an API key; the project must belong to the calling key. Does NOT return the full house specification (rooms, colours, sources) -- use house_ref with palette_pdf to render a document from a project, or project_versions to see its version history. An unknown, deleted, expired, or not-owned project_id all return the same generic not-found response, by design.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
versionNoSpecific version number to describe. Omit for the project's current version.
project_idYesThe project_id returned by house_specify for an authenticated (keyed) call.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation aligns with 'Retrieve'. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations: API key requirement, ownership check, uniform not-found response for unknown/deleted/expired/not-owned IDs, and the exclusion of the full house specification. No contradiction.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence earns its place: return value, auth/ownership, exclusions/alternatives, and error behavior. No wasted words.

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?

The tool is simple (get by ID, optional version) and an output schema exists, so return values are covered. The description handles all edge cases: auth, ownership, uniform not-found, and clearly delineates scope from related tools. Complete.

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 already covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds meaning by stating project_id comes from house_specify and that version refers to the 'requested version' whose content hash is returned, enriching the schema baseline.

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 opens with 'Retrieve summary metadata for a durable house project you own' — a specific verb, resource, and ownership scope. It also clearly states what the tool does NOT return and points to palette_pdf and project_versions, making it easy to distinguish from siblings.

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 states the precondition ('Requires an API key; the project must belong to the calling key'), and explicitly says when to use alternatives: use house_ref with palette_pdf for full specs, or project_versions for version history. The not-found behavior is also disclosed.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tool clusters perform near-identical functions: extract_image_colours, image_palette and palette_extract all extract dominant colours from images; colour_passport, colour_dna, colour_metrics and colour_cultural_risk all profile a single hex; and at least six compound 'complete package' tools (agent_brief, archive_report_brief, brand_report, design_session, image_brief, session_brief) overlap heavily in scope. The descriptions try to differentiate -- some even point to tool_guide for routing -- but the volume and similarity of clusters makes misselection likely.

Naming Consistency4/5

The vast majority of tools follow a clear domain_prefix_suffix pattern (colour_, palette_, archive_, brand_, accessibility_, project_) and within families naming is very disciplined (brand_guideline_specify/select/pdf/claims/status, project_get/list/versions/delete). However, a handful of outliers invert the order (extract_image_colours, ingest_image, render_colour_result, query_hex) and some descriptions reference tools that don't exist as endpoints (palette_from_concept, match_paint_system, get_colour_metrics).

Tool Count1/5

88 tools is far beyond any reasonable single-server surface, even for a platform spanning archives, branding, interiors and accessibility. The sheer number forces agents into a massive decision space, and many tools exist purely as convenience wrappers that replace chains of 3-6 other tools, suggesting aggressive consolidation was needed.

Completeness4/5

The surface covers an unusually broad domain -- archive search, colour science, palettes, branding, interiors, accessibility, image extraction, projects, and PDF/Word/Excel exports -- with very few dead ends for end-user workflows. Minor gaps: several compound-tool descriptions reference tools that no longer exist, and valid archive names are only discoverable via error messages rather than a dedicated listing endpoint.

Resources