iGods GEO Visibility Tool (GVT)

Render a prompt workflow

gvt_get_prompt

Read-onlyIdempotent

Render a GVT prompt workflow with concrete argument values, returning the complete step-by-step instruction text ready to follow. Also returns the effective arguments that were bound (provided values plus defaults for omitted optionals). Prompt names and their arguments come from gvt_list_prompts; an unknown name or argument key errors rather than guessing. The rendered text references GVT tools by name — call them as instructed.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "gvt_get_prompt"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes	Prompt name from gvt_list_prompts, e.g. gvt_setup_domain_monitoring.
`arguments`	No	Argument values for the prompt, keyed by argument name (e.g. {"domain": "example.com", "frequency": "weekly"}). Omit optional arguments to use their defaults.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	The prompt name that was rendered
`text`	No	Fully interpolated instruction text referencing GVT tools by name
`arguments`	No	Effective arguments after binding defaults
`description`	No	The prompt catalog description

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 10, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / description / description
```
Added value: +"The prompt catalog description"
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / name / description
```
Added value: +"The prompt name that was rendered"
```

Changed1 schema field changedSep 10, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "arguments": {
+      "description": "Effective arguments after binding defaults",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "description": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "text": {
+      "description": "Fully interpolated instruction text referencing GVT tools by name",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true, readOnlyHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so no contradiction. The description adds value beyond annotations by disclosing that it errors on unknown names/arguments rather than guessing, and that it returns effective arguments with defaults applied. It also states the output includes step-by-step instruction text, which is not in annotations. Minor gap: no mention of output format beyond being text, but with an output schema present, that is acceptable.

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?

The description is three sentences: the first gives the core purpose and output, the second explains source and error behavior, and the third instructs how to use the output. It is tightly written with no filler, though it front-loads the purpose but leaves the error caveat until the second sentence. Slightly more wordy than ideal but efficient.

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?

Given two parameters with full schema coverage and an output schema present, the description is complete for invoking the tool. It covers argument binding default behavior and error handling. One minor gap: it doesn't explicitly say that the returned steps might require additional context from gvt_list_prompts, but that is strong enough. The output schema likely details the return structure, so this is sufficient.

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 100%: the name parameter description is clear and provides an example, and arguments is described with a key-value example. The description adds value by clarifying that omitted optional arguments use defaults and that it returns effective arguments, but this is about behavior rather than parameter format. The schema already explains both parameters well, so description doesn't add significant new meaning.

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 clearly states the tool renders a GVT prompt workflow with concrete arguments and returns the instruction text plus bound arguments. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like gvt_list_prompts by referencing it as the source of prompt names/arguments, and from other get_* tools by focusing on prompt rendering rather than retrieving data.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: when you need a rendered prompt workflow. It references sibling gvt_list_prompts for obtaining valid prompt names/argumentsages, and warns that unknown names/arguments cause errors, guiding the agent to check that list first. It also instructs to call the GVT tools referenced in the rendered text, avoiding misuse.

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

All iGods GEO Visibility Tool (GVT) 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?