lookup_jmeter_propertySearch or lookup curated JMeter properties (e.g. "httpclient4.idletimeout", "jmeter.save.saveservice.*", "remote_hosts", "summariser"). Returns category, defaults, and recommendations.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | Property name or keyword to search (e.g. "ssl", "timeout", "jtl", "influxdb"). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does state what the tool returns ('category, defaults, and recommendations'), which is helpful for a read-only lookup. However, it does not reveal response shape, whether matching is exact or fuzzy, or how missing properties are handled.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences with no redundancy. The action and target are front-loaded, examples provide high-density clarification, and the output summary is concise. Every sentence earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a single-parameter lookup tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description sufficiently covers the tool's purpose, query semantics, and return contents. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to invoke it correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema already provides a clear description for query with 100% coverage. The tool description adds complementary value by giving real example property names and keywords, which illustrates both the expected format and the breadth of searchable content.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description opens with a specific verb ('Search or lookup') and a specific resource ('curated JMeter properties'), backed by concrete examples. The combination of 'properties' and the returned fields ('category, defaults, and recommendations') clearly distinguishes it from siblings like search_jmeter_docs and lookup_error_playbook.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies when to use the tool through its examples and phrasing, but it never explicitly says when to prefer this over alternatives or lists exclusions. An agent must infer that this is for property lookups versus other JMeter-related search tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.