Skip to main content
Glama

Warmth Engine Observatory

by com.warmthengine

get_event_stack

Assemble the stack journey for one event — its kind-labelled value-chain neighbourhood at depth 1, the same composition the Atlas renders, in one call. Returns three separate arrays, never merged: coordination — the event's own Coordination Connections (CCs), all seven connection types, directed (types 1/3/4/5) and bidirectional/sibling (types 2/6/7) alike; each carries type/confidence/direction, plus evidence at full tier; material — the event's own Infrastructure-Thread edges, one per source→target pair, each with its sourced asset facts (linkType + asset + naming field); capability — the active Sovereign Capability Profile (SCP) dimension-membership waypoints for the event itself (actor, dimension, link_type, attribution, entity, and the link's link_id and lifecycle fields; plus qualification_basis/rationale/note at full tier). The three are different kinds of claim: a thread is a factual asset match, not a CC, and is never rendered as one. The capability array carries active links only and takes no parameter to widen it — a stack is the event's neighbourhood as the corpus now stands; for retired memberships, use get_capability_links with include_retired. A derived view over the existing connections, threads, and capability links — each substrate keeps its own gating, and the free tier leaks no paid fields. For the material layer alone, use get_threads; for the directed multi-hop coordination lineage between events, use traverse_coordination. Pass event_id.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
event_idYesFocal event id e.g. "196" — the event whose stack neighbourhood to assemble

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full burden, and it delivers: it specifies the three-array, never-merged return shape, distinguishes the epistemic status of threads vs CCs, notes the capability array is active-only, and explains the tool is a derived view whose substrates keep their own gating and leak no paid fields on the free tier. This goes well beyond what the schema expresses.

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 long but every sentence earns its place: it front-loads the purpose in the first line, uses labeled inline details for the three arrays, and closes with routing alternatives. Without an output schema, this density is necessary rather than padded.

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 tool with one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the definition fully covers what returns come back, the meaning of each array, access/gating semantics, and the exact alternatives. Nothing an agent needs to decide whether to call it or interpret its result 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?

The input schema already describes event_id fully, including an example ('196'), so the description adds little semantic value; it merely echoes 'Pass event_id.' With 100% schema coverage, 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?

The opening sentence states the specific operation ('Assemble the stack journey for one event') and resource (kind-labelled value-chain neighbourhood at depth 1), so an agent can see exactly what the call does. It also distinguishes itself by naming sibling tools for related but narrower tasks (get_threads, traverse_coordination, get_capability_links), making the identity unmistakable.

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?

The description gives explicit routing conditions: use get_threads for material layer alone, traverse_coordination for multi-hop coordination lineage, and get_capability_links with include_retired for retired memberships. It also states that the capability array deliberately takes no widening parameter, telling agents when not to expect broader behavior.

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

All Warmth Engine Observatory 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

A4.6/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct data slice or operation. For example, `get_actors` retrieves full actor profiles while `query_scp` offers pivoting and comparison; `search_events` finds event IDs and `get_event` retrieves a full record; `get_threads` provides material links separate from `traverse_coordination` for lineage walks. There is no overlap in purpose.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent `verb_noun` pattern with underscore separators. Most use `get_` for retrieval, with `query_scp`, `search_events`, and `traverse_coordination` using different verbs that accurately reflect their distinct actions. The naming is predictable and intuitive.

Tool Count5/5

16 tools is well-scoped for the complexity of an observation platform that covers actors, blocs, events, connections, topology, vocabulary, statistics, and material links. Each tool earns its place by covering a necessary query pattern without unnecessary fragmentation.

Completeness5/5

The tool set provides comprehensive coverage of the domain: actor retrieval and querying (profiles, comparisons, watch), bloc membership, event discovery and full records, connection traversal and filtering, structural topology, material links, vocabulary lookups, and summary statistics. No obvious gaps in read access are present.

Resources