Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

apis-io

by io.apis
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

get_provider_artifacts

Read-only

Every artifact a provider publishes — provider-level (MCP, security, scopes, rules, agentic-access) and per-API (OpenAPI, Arazzo, overlays, reference docs) — grouped by type with counts. by_type_counts is the full summary; pass type (e.g. OpenAPI, MCP) to scope the artifacts list to one type, since an unfiltered provider can be 250+ entries.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugYesProvider slug — lowercase, hyphenated, as find_providers returns it, e.g. "stripe".
typeNoReturn only artifacts of this type (synonym-aware: MCP matches MCPServer).
contextNoOptional: one sentence on why you are asking. Never used to rank; read only if a result is wrong.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / context / description
      Previous value: -"Optional: why you are asking. One sentence — the task you are trying to complete, or what you expect to get back. Never included in the answer and never used to rank; it is read only when a result turns out to be wrong, which is when knowing the intent is what makes the report actionable."New value: +"Optional: one sentence on why you are asking. Never used to rank; read only if a result is wrong."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / slug / description
      Added value: +"Provider slug — lowercase, hyphenated, as find_providers returns it, e.g. \"stripe\"."
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / context
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional: why you are asking. One sentence — the task you are trying to complete, or what you expect to get back. Never included in the answer and never used to rank; it is read only when a result turns out to be wrong, which is when knowing the intent is what makes the report actionable.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  4. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / type
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Return only artifacts of this type (synonym-aware: MCP matches MCPServer).",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  5. Added

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds non-trivial behavior: results are grouped by type with counts, by_type_counts is the complete summary, and unfiltered result sets can be 250+ entries — useful scale and response-shape disclosure not present in the structured fields.

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 dense sentences, no filler: the first defines scope and output structure, the second gives the filtering rule and its rationale. Front-loaded and every clause earns its place.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining the return shape, and it does (grouped by type with counts, by_type_counts as full summary). Combined with the readOnly annotation and the 100%-covered schema, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly.

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 baseline is 3; the description earns above that by explaining the semantics of `type` (scope the artifact list to one type) and the practical consequence of omitting it (250+ entries). It adds operational meaning beyond the schema's terse per-parameter text.

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?

Names the resource precisely ('every artifact a provider publishes') and enumerates the two scopes it covers — provider-level (MCP, security, scopes, rules, agentic-access) and per-API (OpenAPI, Arazzo, overlays, reference docs) — plus the output shape ('grouped by type with counts'). An agent can tell this apart from per-API or single-artifact siblings 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 Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly tells the agent when to pass `type` (to scope the list) and why (unfiltered providers can exceed 250 entries), which is real selection guidance. It does not name alternative tools such as find_artifacts or get_api_artifacts, so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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

All apis-io toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources