Skip to main content
Glama

Mizan Calibration

get_agent

Fetch one public Diwan al-Mizan listing by id or exact name. Read-only. A listing is not an endorsement.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_agent"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoThe listing id, for example qants-mizan.
nameNoExact listing name, used if id is omitted.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden; it discloses 'Read-only' and adds a meaningful data-semantics caveat ('A listing is not an endorsement'). It does not disclose what happens when nothing is found, what fields are returned, or the behavior when both optional parameters are omitted.

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?

Three short sentences with the operation and keys front-loaded, followed by a brief safety and trust disclaimer. No filler, though the endorsement caveat is tangential to invocation mechanics.

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 simple two-optional-parameter read tool this is close to adequate, but with zero required parameters the definition never says what happens if both id and name are omitted, nor how a not-found result is signalled. Those are the main remaining gaps given no output schema exists.

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 only reinforces that lookups are by id or by exact (not fuzzy) name. It adds no matching-tolerance or ambiguity-resolution detail beyond the schema.

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 ('Fetch'), a single resource ('one public Diwan al-Mizan listing'), and the two lookup keys (id or exact name). This clearly distinguishes a singular lookup from the plural sibling 'search_agents', though it does not name an alternative 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?

The phrase 'by id or exact name' implies the precondition for use (you already know the identifier), and the schema notes name is 'used if id is omitted'. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no pointer to 'search_agents' for agents who do not yet have an identifier.

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.