Skip to main content
Glama

DERO MCP Server

by io.github.DHEBP

tela_get_doc_content

Read-only

Composite: fetch the actual file content stored in a TELA-DOC-1 contract. A DOC's file (HTML/CSS/JS/...) lives inside a DVM-BASIC comment block in the contract code — NOT in a stored variable — so this tool fetches DERO.GetSC, confirms the SCID is a DOC, and extracts the file bytes. Gzip-compressed files (a .gz filename, the TELA-CLI default) are transparently base64-decoded + decompressed to plaintext. Large files paginate via offset.

When to call: when a user wants to READ or inspect the actual code/markup a TELA app file holds (e.g. "show me the HTML of this TELA DOC", "what does this app's app.js contain"). Get DOC SCIDs from tela_inspect on an INDEX first. PREFER this over dero_get_sc: that returns the raw DVM contract wrapper; this extracts just the embedded file content and reports docType, size, and signature presence.

Input Requirements:

  • scid is REQUIRED. Must be 64 hex chars and reference a TELA-DOC-1 contract (an INDEX or non-TELA SCID returns INVALID_INPUT with guidance).

  • offset is OPTIONAL. Byte offset into the extracted content; pass next_offset to read the next chunk of a large file.

  • topoheight is OPTIONAL. Omit for the latest committed state.

Output: { scid, topoheight, filename, doc_type, sub_dir, content_embedded, content, content_offset, content_length, content_truncated, next_offset, compressed, decompressed, stored_filename, signature, signature_note, note, narrative, related_docs }. content is the plaintext file (a 60000-char chunk; paginate via next_offset), or null when content is not embedded (DocShard/STATIC/external). compressed is true for .gz files; decompressed is true when this tool gunzipped them (filename then strips .gz; stored_filename keeps the on-chain name). The contract's author signature presence is reported but NOT cryptographically verified.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
scidYes64-char hex Smart Contract ID of a TELA-DOC-1 file contract
offsetNoByte offset into the extracted file content; use next_offset to paginate large files
topoheightNoOptional topo height; omit for latest committed state

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds substantial behavioral context: the file lives in a DVM-BASIC comment block, gzip files are decompressed, large files paginate, and signatures are reported but not cryptographically verified. No contradiction with 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?

Although long, the description is well-structured with clear sections: composite behavior, when to call, input requirements, and output breakdown. Every sentence adds operational value, and the structure aids quick scanning despite the high level of detail.

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 fully compensates by enumerating the entire output object, explaining content chunking, pagination, compressed/decompressed states, stored_filename semantics, docType, signature presence, and edge cases like DocShard/STATIC/external content. This is complete for a complex tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Despite 100% schema coverage, the description enriches each parameter: scid is required and invalid inputs get INVALID_INPUT, offset is linked to next_offset pagination, and topoheight should be omitted for latest state. It also clarifies expected types and failure behavior beyond schema definitions.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'fetch the actual file content stored in a TELA-DOC-1 contract.' It clarifies the composite nature (fetches DERO.GetSC, confirms SCID, extracts bytes) and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like dero_get_sc and tela_inspect.

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?

Provides explicit 'When to call' guidance, explains how to obtain SCIDs via tela_inspect, and directly contrasts with dero_get_sc: 'PREFER this over dero_get_sc: that returns the raw DVM contract wrapper; this extracts just the embedded file content.' This is exemplary usage guidance.

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

All DERO MCP Server toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose, with detailed descriptions that specify when to call it and how it differs from similar tools. Composite tools are well-defined, overlapping concerns are minimized.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names follow a general pattern: 'dero_' for core daemon RPC wrappers, 'tela_' for TELA-specific composites, and descriptive names for other composites. While mostly consistent, there are exceptions like 'audit_chain_artifact_claim' and 'dero_durl_to_scid' breaking the pattern slightly.

Tool Count4/5

With 32 tools, the server is comprehensive but slightly heavy. However, each tool serves a specific need in the DERO ecosystem, covering chain queries, docs, TELA, and composite analyses. The count is justifiable given the domain breadth.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers core chain operations, documentation, TELA app lifecycle, and common analytical tasks. Minor gaps exist, such as lack of wallet interaction tools or transaction submission, but these are outside the apparent read-only/analysis scope.

Resources