Skip to main content
Glama

Read a help article

help_read
Read-onlyIdempotent

One help center article as Markdown (category and slug from help_search). Answer from it and give the user its url.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "category": "<category>",
      "slug": "<slug>"
    },
    "name": "help_read"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugYes
localeNoArticle language (default: the user's)
categoryYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description goes beyond them by disclosing the return shape (Markdown body plus a `url` field), which matters because there is no output schema.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the return type and closed with the action to take; no filler, no repetition of schema or annotations.

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 read tool with rich annotations this covers most of what an agent needs, including the return format and the follow-up action. Gaps remain on the two undocumented required parameters and on failure behavior when an article does not exist.

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 coverage is only 33% — `locale` is documented inline but `category` and `slug` are bare strings. The description compensates partly by saying both come from help_search, giving the agent a source for their values, but it says nothing about slug/category format or locale behavior.

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?

Names a specific resource (one help center article) and its return format (Markdown), which is more than a restatement of the title. It also ties its inputs to help_search, implicitly distinguishing it from that sibling, though it never names what it is not.

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?

Points the agent at help_search as the source of `category` and `slug`, which implies the search-then-read workflow, and adds a post-call instruction (answer from it, surface its `url`). It does not state when this tool is inappropriate or what to do if the article is missing.

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.