Skip to main content
Glama

Get match details

get_match_details
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get the full details of one match: what the other person wrote, why the two of them matched, something to open with, and where the match stands. It only reads. To accept, decline or block the match, call respond_to_match. Never promise an address.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
match_idYesThe match_id from check_matches.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
stateYes
match_idYes
icebreakerYesSomething to open with.
their_nameNo
you_acceptedYes
introduced_atNo
they_acceptedYes
why_you_matchedYes
their_request_textYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
      +  "additionalProperties": false,
      +  "properties": {
      +    "icebreaker": {
      +      "anyOf": [
      +        {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        {
      +          "type": "null"
      +        }
      +      ],
      +      "description": "Something to open with."
      +    },
      +    "introduced_at": {
      +      "anyOf": [
      +        {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        {
      +          "type": "null"
      +        }
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "match_id": {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "state": {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "their_name": {
      +      "anyOf": [
      +        {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        {
      +          "type": "null"
      +        }
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "their_request_text": {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "they_accepted": {
      +      "type": "boolean"
      +    },
      +    "why_you_matched": {
      +      "anyOf": [
      +        {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        {
      +          "type": "null"
      +        }
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "you_accepted": {
      +      "type": "boolean"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "required": [
      +    "match_id",
      +    "state",
      +    "their_request_text",
      +    "why_you_matched",
      +    "icebreaker",
      +    "you_accepted",
      +    "they_accepted"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  3. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / accept
      Removed value: -{
      -  "description": "Record that the user accepts this match.",
      -  "type": "boolean"
      -}
    • removedInput schema / properties / block
      Removed value: -{
      -  "description": "Never match the user with this person again. This is permanent. Set it only when the user asks for exactly that. A plain 'no thanks' is a decline, not a block.",
      -  "type": "boolean"
      -}
    • removedInput schema / properties / decline
      Removed value: -{
      -  "description": "Pass on this match. It covers this request only. The next request from the same person can still match.",
      -  "type": "boolean"
      -}
  4. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / match_id / pattern
      Added value: +"^([0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[1-8][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[89abAB][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}|00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000|ffffffff-ffff-ffff-ffff-ffffffffffff)$"
  5. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so 'It only reads' is largely redundant. However, 'Never promise an address' is a genuinely non-obvious behavioral caution that structured fields do not convey, adding real value beyond the annotations.

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 front-loaded sentences carry the purpose, the sibling routing, and the usage caution with no filler. The only minor redundancy is 'It only reads' against the readOnly annotation.

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?

An output schema exists, so the return payload need not be explained, and the description covers scope, alternative tool, and a use constraint. It leaves minor gaps such as error or auth behavior for a single-id lookup, but nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly is missing.

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?

There is one parameter with 100% schema description coverage, and the schema already states the source ('The match_id from check_matches'). The description adds no further naming, format, or provenance detail, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 and resource ('Get the full details of one match') and enumerates the returned content: what the other person wrote, why they matched, an opener, and match status. That scope is distinguishable from check_matches (list) and respond_to_match (action).

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 routes the agent: 'To accept, decline or block the match, call respond_to_match' names the alternative and the condition that selects it. It also adds a negative constraint ('Never promise an address') that bounds how the result may be used.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources