Skip to main content
Glama

Open-End Response Analyser – coding of open-ended survey answers

Get project details

open_end_get_project
Read-onlyIdempotent

Returns one project: research question, dataset (response counts), category hierarchies and the latest runs with their status. Use it to check what has already been done in a project before starting anything. Requires OAuth or an API key.

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": {
      "project_id": "<project_id>"
    },
    "name": "open_end_get_project"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds an auth requirement ('Requires OAuth or an API key') and the shape of the returned data, but says nothing about behavior for an unknown or inaccessible project_id.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the return contents, then use case, then prerequisite. Every clause carries information; nothing is redundant with the name or title.

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?

For a single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers return contents, purpose, and auth prerequisites sufficiently to call it correctly. The one residual gap is how to obtain a valid project_id.

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 0% and the sole parameter, project_id, is undocumented in the schema (only type/minimum). The phrase 'Returns one project' implies an identifier is needed but adds no meaning about where the ID comes from (presumably list_projects) or its format.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Returns one project') and enumerates the payload: research question, dataset with response counts, category hierarchies, and latest runs with status. That distinguishes it from open_end_list_projects by emphasizing the single-project scope, though it never names that sibling explicitly.

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?

Gives a concrete usage context: 'check what has already been done in a project before starting anything.' It does not name alternatives (e.g. get_run for a specific run's detail or list_projects for discovery), so an agent must infer routing.

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