FMEPM Connect for Oracle EPM

Read application properties and maintenance

read_application_info

Read-onlyIdempotent

Reads application properties or the pod's build version and daily maintenance window. Both use GET and change no settings. Properties include storage type, hybrid mode and administrator-only mode. Maintenance requests the configured time zone; a missing zone stays unknown. The application list and maintenance setting are pod-wide, so application-restricted policies refuse this tool. Oracle's administrator or migration permissions still apply. Use it to check the current configuration before planning work. https://docs.oracle.com/en/cloud/saas/enterprise-performance-management-common/prest/lcm_get_build_version_and_maintenance_time_v2.html

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": {
      "action": "<action>"
    },
    "name": "read_application_info"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Maximum metadata rows within the policy cell limit.
`action`	Yes	Read application properties or the daily maintenance window.
`connection`	No	Connection id or label from list_connections. Defaults to the user's default connection.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), yet the description still adds value: TLS/permission requirements, the refusal behavior under application-restricted policies, and the edge case that a missing time zone stays unknown. Only the redundant "Both use GET and change no settings" sentence adds nothing beyond the hints.

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 the two modes, then constraints, then usage advice — a sensible ordering. It is slightly dense and one sentence repeats what readOnlyHint already declares, but no sentence is wasted overall.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and largely succeeds by naming the fields returned for both actions and the unknown-time-zone behavior. The limit parameter's row-cap semantics are only in the schema, a minor gap for an otherwise self-contained definition.

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 baseline is 3, but the description goes further by explaining what each action value returns semantically (properties content vs. maintenance time zone) and that the data is pod-wide. The limit parameter is left entirely to the schema, which keeps this from a 5.

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?

Uses a specific verb (Reads) plus two precisely named resources (application properties, pod build version / daily maintenance window), and enumerates what properties contain (storage type, hybrid mode, administrator-only mode). This is far beyond a restatement of the name and lets an agent distinguish it from list_applications or read_planning.

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?

"Use it to check the current configuration before planning work" gives a clear usage context, and the description adds real gating conditions (application-restricted policies refuse this tool; administrator or migration permissions still apply). It does not name an explicit alternative for the properties-vs-list_applications case, so it falls short of a full when/when-not map.

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

All FMEPM Connect for Oracle EPM 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?