Skip to main content
Glama

Opedd — Licensed Content for AI

by com.opedd

get_content

Retrieve the full body of a licensed article using a buyer API token (opedd_buyer_live_* canonical; opedd_buyer_test_* for sandbox). Requires OPEDD_BUYER_TOKEN env var (create one at opedd.com/licenses after purchasing). Works for per-article licenses (token scoped to that article) and archive licenses (token covers all publisher content). The publisher must have content delivery enabled and must have pushed content for the article. Phase 11 M2 RAG-extended shape: response includes 7 RAG-essential metadata fields — author, language, word_count, content_hash, image_urls, canonical_url, tags. On pre-2026-05-14 historical articles, optional fields (author/language/image_urls/canonical_url/tags) may be NULL. NULL means 'data unavailable for this article', NOT 'explicitly empty' — treat as data-missing when filtering; do not interpret as anti-match.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
article_idYesThe Opedd article UUID to retrieve content for
buyer_tokenNoBuyer API token (opedd_buyer_live_* or opedd_buyer_test_*). Falls back to OPEDD_BUYER_TOKEN env var.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It thoroughly discloses authentication requirements, token fallback, license scope, publisher conditions, response shape with 7 metadata fields, and extensive NULL semantics with a caution not to interpret NULL as anti-match. This is exceptionally transparent.

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?

The description is longer than average, but every sentence serves a purpose: action, prerequisites, license types, conditions, response details, and NULL semantics. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and structured logically.

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?

For a read tool with no output schema, the description is remarkably complete. It lists the 7 RAG-essential metadata fields, explains nullability on historical articles, clarifies data-missing semantics, and states all needed conditions. No significant gaps remain.

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 the baseline is 3. The description goes beyond schema by explaining token pattern (buyer_live_*/buyer_test_*), fallback to env var, and the meaning of NULL in historical articles, adding significant value.

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?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves the full body of a licensed article, with specific verb+resource. It implies content retrieval rather than metadata lookup, but does not explicitly distinguish from the sibling tool lookup_content, which could overlap in purpose.

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?

The description provides clear context on when to use the tool: requires OPEDD_BUYER_TOKEN, supports per-article and archive licenses, and requires publisher content delivery. It gives prerequisites and conditions but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it.

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

All Opedd — Licensed Content for AI toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have distinct purposes, but list_feed and stream_feed_ndjson both list licensed articles (with different formats), and browse_registry vs publisher_directory could confuse agents about scope. Overall, the set is mostly clear.

Naming Consistency4/5

Names follow a verb_noun pattern with underscores (e.g., get_content, purchase_license). A few outliers like rsl_get and article_53_attestation break the pattern slightly, but the majority are consistent.

Tool Count4/5

17 tools cover buyer, publisher, and discovery workflows. While slightly above the typical 3-15 range, the complexity of the licensing platform justifies the count. No tool seems redundant.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers discovery, purchase, content retrieval, compliance, and attestation comprehensively. Minor gaps like missing license management or key rotation are acceptable given the domain scope.

Resources