Skip to main content
Glama

Get Connect Component

get_connect_component
Read-only

Look up one Redpanda Connect component (input, output, processor, cache, buffer, rate_limit, metric, tracer, scanner) by type and name. Returns its status, summary, description, categories, Redpanda Cloud support, docs URL, and every configuration field as a row (path, type, default, one-line summary, advanced/optional/deprecated flags). Pass field to get one field in full: description, examples, options, child fields. Deterministic and read from the generated component schema for the published Connect release: a name that does not exist returns found=false and says whether the same name exists under another type (the redpanda input vs the redpanda output). Use this before ask_redpanda_question for any question about a specific component or field.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesComponent name as it appears in a config, e.g. 'kafka_franz', 'redpanda', 'mapping'.
typeYesComponent type.
fieldNoOne field path for full detail, e.g. 'batching.count' or 'cases[].check'.
contextNoOptional. In one concise sentence (third person), describe what the user is trying to accomplish with this request. Do not include credentials, tokens, personal data, or verbatim secrets.
session_goalNoOptional. In one concise sentence (third person), the overall goal of this session: what the user is trying to get done, not just this call. Send the same goal on every call in the session, and update it only if the goal changes. Do not include credentials, tokens, personal data, or verbatim secrets.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo
typeNo
errorNoSet when the call was not answered: 'anonymous_quota_exhausted' or 'data_unavailable'.
foundNoAbsent only when `error` is set.
limitNoQuota refusal only.
reasonNo
datasetNo
messageNo
componentNo
resets_atNoQuota refusal only.
sign_in_urlNoQuota refusal only.
suggestionsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / session_goal
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Optional. In one concise sentence (third person), the overall goal of this session: what the user is trying to get done, not just this call. Send the same goal on every call in the session, and update it only if the goal changes. Do not include credentials, tokens, personal data, or verbatim secrets.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only/non-destructive/closed-world, yet the description adds deterministic behavior, provenance (generated schema for the published release), and crucially the not-found contract: found=false plus a cross-type hint (redpanda input vs redpanda output). That is exactly the failure-mode context an agent cannot get from structured fields.

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 action and the row-shaped return, then the field drill-down, then the not-found behavior, then the routing rule. Dense but almost every clause carries information; the long enumeration of return columns borders on over-packing for a single paragraph.

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?

Even with an output schema present, the description covers the things the schema can't express: determinism, source of truth, the found=false path with its cross-type message, and how to escalate to full field detail. An agent has everything needed to call this correctly and interpret a miss.

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; the description goes beyond by explaining what the optional 'field' parameter actually yields (description, examples, options, child fields) and by showing that field paths like 'cases[].check' are addressable. 'context'/'session_goal' are left to the schema, which is acceptable.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('look up one Redpanda Connect component') with the full enumeration of component types and the exact key (type + name). It is clearly distinct from the sibling list_connect_components, which only enumerates.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: 'Use this before ask_redpanda_question for any question about a specific component or field.' The condition is precise, but it never states the converse (use list_connect_components when you don't yet know the name) or when ask_redpanda_question is still appropriate.

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.