Skip to main content
Glama

viaSocket

call_any_read_api_of_viasocket

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read from any viaSocket API endpoint with a GET request for the user and return its response. Use it once you know the exact endpoint: look it up with get_viasocket_api_docs first to get its URL, headers, query params and body, unless the skill or a dedicated tool on this server already gives them exactly. Load the quickstart-viasocket skill first: it explains which tool to use when. For POST, PUT, PATCH and DELETE use call_any_api_of_viasocket. Pass the full url with path variables filled in, the headers the docs list, and query params in query (not in the url). For the auth header the docs name (Authorization, proxy_auth_token, x-api-key, ...), pass it with an empty value "": the signed-in user's token is filled in automatically. Never put a real or made-up token there; if the docs name no auth header, leave it out and the token is sent as Authorization. If the API needs the user to sign in, they're asked the first time. Returns { status, ok, headers, data }: the HTTP status and the response body, including error details on failure.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesFull endpoint URL with path variables replaced by real values, e.g. https://api.example.com/users/42. Put query params in `query`, not here.
queryNoQuery params as name/value pairs; an array sends the param once per item. Example: {"type": "flow", "bringflows": true}
headersYesRequest headers as name/value pairs, as the docs list them. Give the auth header (Authorization, proxy_auth_token, x-api-key, ...) an empty value "" so the signed-in user's token is filled in; never put a token here yourself. Pass {} when the endpoint needs no headers. Example: {"proxy_auth_token": "", "Content-Type": "application/json"}

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/openWorld, and the description adds genuinely non-structured behavior: the empty-value auth-header convention with automatic token injection, the fallback to Authorization when no auth header is named, the first-time sign-in prompt, and the { status, ok, headers, data } return shape including error details on failure.

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 purpose, then prerequisites, then alternatives, then calling mechanics and return value – a sensible progression with little wasted framing. It is on the long side and repeats the empty-auth-header rule that the headers schema already states, which costs it the top mark.

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 generic open-world HTTP proxy with no output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: how to discover the endpoint, how to shape url/query/headers, how auth is handled, and what comes back. Nothing material is left to guesswork.

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 still adds rules absent from the schema, notably that omitting the auth header causes the token to be sent as Authorization, plus the warning never to supply a real or fabricated token. It largely restates the url-vs-query split and the empty-value convention already in the schema, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource+method: read any viaSocket API endpoint via GET and return its response. It explicitly carves out the sibling boundary by naming call_any_api_of_viasocket as the tool for POST/PUT/PATCH/DELETE, so the agent can pick correctly without opening a 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 ordered prerequisites (load quickstart-viasocket skill, look up the endpoint with get_viasocket_api_docs) and even states the exception where lookup can be skipped if a dedicated tool already provides the details. The alternative for write methods is named with the condition that selects it.

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