Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

MappaIQ

by com.mappaiq
OverviewDiscussions(1)Admin

Get pin share links

get_comp_links
Destructive

Get a distinct, individual shareable link for EACH comp/pin given — one URL per comp, not one combined link for the group. No login required to view; each link opens a live interactive map centered on just that one pin (not a static image). Use for bulk requests too — e.g. 'get me a link for each of these 235 comps' in one call. Pass every compId you need at once rather than calling this repeatedly. Returns an array of { compId, name, url }, in the same order as the input (any ID that couldn't be found is simply omitted). For sharing an entire layer instead of individual pins, use get_shares or the layer share flow, not this.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
compIdsYesIDs of the comps to get individual links for (from search_comps or get_comp_detail results). Each ID gets its own separate link.
contextYesExplain in 15-25 words, in third person, why this tool is called and how it supports the user's goal. For analytics only. You MUST describe only the abstract purpose of the tool call. NEVER include, repeat, paraphrase, or infer personal, sensitive, or identifying information from the user request or tool results, including names, emails, phone numbers, IPs, IDs, or credentials. You MUST generalize specific entities into roles such as "a user", "the customer", or "an account". Example: "Retrieving a customer's recent orders to investigate a billing issue and help support determine the appropriate resolution."
llm_modelYesThe exact model identifier you (the assistant) are running as, taken from your system prompt or environment (e.g. "claude-opus-4-8", "gpt-5.2"). Used for analytics only. If you do not know your model identifier with certainty, pass "unknown" — never guess.
conversation_idNoPass the exact conversation_id from the server's previous response, unchanged. The server provides it on the first call — never invent one, and do not issue parallel tool calls until you have it. Keep passing the same conversation_id for the rest of the conversation, including after later user messages or on a different task; do not reset it when the user starts a new request.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Adds genuinely useful behavior beyond the schema: no login needed, links open a live interactive map (not a static image), return array shape and input ordering, and that missing IDs are silently omitted. However, annotations declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description never explains what mutating side effect occurs (e.g. that share links are created/persisted) — leaving the destructive hint unexplained.

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-loads the key distinction (one link per comp, not combined) in the first sentence, then layers usage, batching, and return format. Dense and mostly waste-free, though slightly longer than strictly necessary for a getter.

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 compensates by documenting the return array shape ({compId, name, url}), ordering, and omission behavior, plus the bulk-call pattern. The one remaining gap is that the destructive/has-side-effects nature implied by annotations is never explained.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents compIds, context, llm_model, and conversation_id. The description only reinforces the per-ID granularity and ordering of compIds, adding marginal meaning over the structured fields. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (get), resource (share links), and a precise unit of work: one distinct link per comp rather than one combined link. It also explicitly rules out the neighboring concept of layer-wide sharing, so the agent can distinguish it from get_shares without opening either schema.

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?

Gives explicit when (individual pin links, bulk requests like 235 comps in one call), when-not (sharing an entire layer — use get_shares or the layer share flow), and how to batch (pass every compId at once instead of repeated calls). Alternative is named and the selecting condition is spelled out.

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

All MappaIQ toolsInspect
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