Skip to main content
Glama

PlugRail JP Recall

by dev.plugrail
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

get_recall_detail

管理番号（11桁）からリコール詳細1件を取得します。入力例: {"management_number": "00000035877"}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
management_numberYes11桁の管理番号。例: "00000035877"

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / management_number / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "number"
+  }
+]
    • removedInput schema / properties / management_number / type
      Removed value: -"string"
  2. First observed

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not state that this is a read-only operation, whether the lookup can fail for a nonexistent/invalid number, or anything about the returned record's shape. The verb 取得 weakly implies a read, but that is the extent of the disclosure.

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?

Two short sentences, purpose front-loaded, example tucked at the end. Nothing wastes space.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a one-parameter lookup with a fully documented schema this is roughly sufficient, but with no annotations and no output schema the description could reasonably say what the returned detail contains and that the call is non-mutating. Those gaps keep it at minimum-viable.

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% and the single parameter is already documented as an 11-digit management number with an example in the schema. The description repeats the digit count and adds an input example, which is marginal value over the structured field.

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: retrieves one recall detail keyed by an 11-digit management number. The singular '1件' (one record) implicitly contrasts with the sibling search_recalls, 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 Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied rather than stated: an agent can infer it should call this when it already holds a management number and wants the full record. There is no explicit guidance on when to prefer search_recalls instead, nor any note on what happens with an unknown number.

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

All PlugRail JP Recall 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