Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Kamy

by dev.kamy
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get a signature template

get_signature_template
Read-only

Fetch one e-signature preset in full, including the placed_fields array and position that list_signature_templates omits. Use it to inspect or copy an existing field layout before applying it through create_signature_request's signatureTemplateId, or as the starting point for a preview_field_placement check against a new render. Read-only and spends no quota. Requires a Kamy API key with the signatures:read scope; without a key, returns dashboard setup instructions.

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": {
      "signatureTemplateId": "<signatureTemplateId>"
    },
    "name": "get_signature_template"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
signatureTemplateIdYesID from list_signature_templates.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false. Description adds 'Read-only and spends no quota' and specifies auth scope, providing extra behavioral context beyond 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?

Three sentences, each adding value. Front-loaded with purpose and key distinction. No redundancy.

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?

Covers what the tool returns (placed_fields, position), usage scenarios, auth requirements, and quota behavior. Though no output schema, description sufficiently informs agent about expected output.

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 coverage is 100% with schema description 'ID from list_signature_templates.' Description repeats exactly that. No additional param semantics added beyond schema, so 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 description explicitly states it fetches a full e-signature preset including placed_fields and position, which list_signature_templates omits. This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tool.

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?

Describes when to use: inspect/copy layout before create_signature_request or as starting point for preview_field_placement. Also mentions required scope. No explicit exclusions, but context is clear.

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

All Kamy toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources