Fetch Hive

Try an MCP gateway tool

test_gateway_tool

Destructive

Call one tool on the gateway's live URL, exactly as an MCP client would, and return the result or the API's error. The gateway must be published. GET tools run at once; any other method can change data in the person's API, so it answers with what it would call first, and runs only when called again with approved: true after the person says yes.

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": {
      "gateway_id": "<gateway_id>",
      "tool": "<tool>"
    },
    "name": "test_gateway_tool"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`tool`	Yes	The tool's name, from get_gateway.
`approved`	No	true only after the person has agreed to a call that is not GET.
`arguments`	No	The tool's arguments.
`gateway_id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructive=true and openWorld=true, but the description adds the crucial two-phase mechanic: non-GET calls do not execute immediately, they return the proposed call and only run on a re-invocation with approved: true. That is exactly the behavioral context annotations cannot convey, though it omits what happens when the gateway is unpublished.

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?

Two sentences, no filler, with the execution contract and the approval guard both front-loaded. The slightly compressed 'answers with what it would call first' still reads clearly in context.

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?

Covers the prerequisite, the approval gating, and the return contract ('the result or the API's error') despite there being no output schema, which is adequate for a 4-parameter execution tool. Only the failure mode for an unpublished gateway is unaddressed.

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 coverage is 75%, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the approved flag's meaning (a second call after consent) and the GET/non-GET distinction, but gateway_id and the nested arguments object are left to name inference and the schema.

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: call one tool on the gateway's live URL as an MCP client would, returning the result or the API's error. That is concrete and distinguishable from management siblings like get_gateway or publish_gateway, though it never names an alternative explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives a real prerequisite ('the gateway must be published') and clear conditional routing: GET runs immediately, any other method returns a preview and requires a second call with approved: true after the person consents. No comparison to sibling tools such as test_gateway_upstream, so it stops short of 5.

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

All Fetch Hive tools Inspect

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

Need Help?