Skip to main content
Glama

Cubite LMS: Learning Management System

Fetch a search result

fetch
Read-only

Read one result found via search as plain text with its public page URL, for quoting or citing it in an answer; this is the fetch half of the search/fetch pair. Pass the result's id exactly as search returned it (e.g. "course:..."). Returns {id, title, text, url, metadata}. A course's text is its public catalog summary (name, description, level, duration in hours, price, subjects, topics), not its lessons. A missing document, another site's content, and a type this connection cannot read all return the same not-found error; an id without a type prefix is rejected as invalid. To work with a course rather than quote it, use course_get for its settings record (ids, flags, dates, enrollment count) and course_content_get for its lessons as EditorJS blocks.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesA document id exactly as `search` returned it, including its type prefix.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe document id that was fetched.
urlYesPublic URL (used for citations).
textYesFull readable text of the document.
titleYesDocument title.
metadataNoExtra key/value details (entity type, dates).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint=false), and the description adds real behavioral content: the returned shape, the fact that three distinct failure modes (missing document, another site's content, unreadable type) collapse into one identical not-found error, and that an unprefixed id is rejected as invalid. It stops short of disclosing text size/truncation limits for long documents, which is the remaining unknown for a fetch tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the purpose and the search/fetch pairing, and every sentence carries non-redundant information (id format, return shape, error semantics, alternatives). It is a dense single paragraph that could be split into shorter units for scanability, but nothing is filler.

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?

Complete for a one-parameter read tool: an output schema exists so return values need no further explanation, and the description nonetheless names the return fields, covers the error and invalid-input cases, and routes to the correct sibling tools for course work.

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% and the single id parameter is already documented, so the baseline is 3. The description still adds value by stating the id must be passed "exactly as search returned it" and giving the concrete "course:..." prefix format, which clarifies the prefix requirement beyond the schema wording.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Read one result found via `search` as plain text with its public page URL") and explicitly positions itself as "the fetch half of the search/fetch pair," so an agent can separate it from search and from the course_* 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 Guidelines5/5

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

Gives the when ("for quoting or citing it in an answer") and the when-not with named alternatives: "To work with a course rather than quote it, use course_get for its settings record ... and course_content_get for its lessons as EditorJS blocks." The routing decision is fully specified.

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.

Resources