Skip to main content
Glama

Query brain objects

query_graph_objects
Read-only

Read back objects a skill wrote earlier, filtered precisely. Use this when you need to know whether something is already recorded rather than to find something by name: has this engagement already been flagged, was this client surfaced today, is there a plan for this week. Filters on type, on the source that wrote the row, on text within the name or description, and on a created-at window in days. Sorts newest, oldest or by name, and pages with offset. For a keyword or semantic hunt across the graph use search_graph_objects; for browsing a whole type use list_graph_objects.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sortNoOrder of results. Default newest.
typeNoOnly objects of this type (e.g. 'fact', 'note').
limitNoMax results (default 20, max 50).
offsetNoSkip this many results, for paging.
sourceNoOnly rows written by this source. Matches either the source recorded on the row or the marker a skill sets on what it writes, so 'capture_understand' and 'extension' both find what capture wrote.
name_containsNoSubstring of the name, case-insensitive.
text_containsNoSubstring of the name or the description, case-insensitive.
follow_up_due_byNoOnly rows whose follow-up date falls on or before this day, as YYYY-MM-DD. This is what 'what is due this week' reads. Use today's date for what is due or overdue.
created_before_daysNoOnly rows created more than N days ago.
created_within_daysNoOnly rows created in the last N days. Use 1 for "already done today".

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / source / description
      Previous value: -"Only rows written by this source, the marker a skill sets on what it writes."New value: +"Only rows written by this source. Matches either the source recorded on the row or the marker a skill sets on what it writes, so 'capture_understand' and 'extension' both find what capture wrote."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / follow_up_due_by
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Only rows whose follow-up date falls on or before this day, as YYYY-MM-DD. This is what 'what is due this week' reads. Use today's date for what is due or overdue.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  3. Added

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 Secret, and the description's 'Read back' is consistent with that. The description adds useful behavioral context by framing the tool as an existence check for skill-written rows and by summarizing the filter dimensions (type, source, text, created-at window). It does not discuss response shape or edge cases, but the safety profile is already covered by 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?

The description is economically written in five sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose, immediately gives the decision-relevant use case, then summarizes filters and explicitly names sibling tools. Every sentence earns its place.

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 tool with 10 optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, use cases, filter categories, sorting, paging, and alternatives. It does not describe the return shape, but the read-only context and thorough schema descriptions mitigate that gap. It is complete enough for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description groups parameters into themes ('type, on the source that wrote the row, on text ... and on a created-at window') rather than adding new semantics, and references sorting and offset. It adds a little navigation value but does not materially go beyond what the schema already documents.

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 description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Read back objects a skill wrote earlier, filtered precisely.' It clearly distinguishes this tool from search_graph_objects and list_graph_objects by naming those alternatives and their different intents, so an agent can select it correctly.

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 when-to-use conditions with concrete examples: 'when you need to know whether something is already recorded rather than to find something by name' and lists scenarios like checking if an engagement was flagged. It also explicitly routes to alternatives: 'For a keyword or semantic hunt ... use search_graph_objects; for browsing a whole type use list_graph_objects.'

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.