Skip to main content
Glama

canton-ccpedia

by io.github.UnityNodes

get_mailing_thread

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get every message (oldest first) in a specific Canton Network governance mailing-list thread on lists.sync.global (cip-discuss, cip-vote, grants-discuss, etc.). Canton-only. Pass the thread id from list_mailing_threads. This is the email/mailing-list channel. Not the web forum (get_discussion) or GitHub Discussions.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThread id exactly as list_mailing_threads prints it. Both forms work: a numeric archive topic id ("119286914") and a message id for messages the archive never threaded ("cip-discuss-809").
limitNoHow many messages (oldest first) to return. Default 25, max 100. The header states the full held count and the range shown.
offsetNoSkip this many messages before returning, for paging through a long thread.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 25,
+  "description": "How many messages (oldest first) to return. Default 25, max 100. The header states the full held count and the range shown.",
+  "maximum": 100,
+  "minimum": 1,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / offset
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 0,
+  "description": "Skip this many messages before returning, for paging through a long thread.",
+  "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Previous value: -"Thread id, e.g. \"cip-discuss-12345\"."New value: +"Thread id exactly as list_mailing_threads prints it. Both forms work: a numeric archive topic id (\"119286914\") and a message id for messages the archive never threaded (\"cip-discuss-809\")."
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds useful behavioral context: it is Canton-only, returns messages oldest-first, and identifies the specific mailing lists. This is more than the annotations alone provide, though it does not disclose any additional auth or rate-limit constraints.

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?

The description is three sentences, each serving a purpose: stating the core function, specifying the input source, and explicitly distinguishing from alternatives. It is front-loaded with the most important information and avoids redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple read-only list tool with 3 well-documented parameters, the description is adequate. It identifies the exact resource, scope, ordering, and exclusions. It does not describe return value format, but no output schema exists and the header/range details are partially covered by the limit parameter description. Overall, it is complete for practical use.

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 100%, with the id parameter description already explaining both accepted forms and limit/offset having full range/default documentation. The description's only additional parameter insight is 'Pass the thread id from list_mailing_threads,' which primarily reinforces schema content. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves every message in a specific Canton Network governance mailing-list thread, with ordering specified (oldest first) and the exact platform (lists.sync.global). It explicitly distinguishes from siblings by stating it is not the web forum (get_discussion) or GitHub Discussions, and references list_mailing_threads as the source of the thread id.

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?

The description provides direct usage guidance: 'Pass the thread id from list_mailing_threads.' It also clarifies the intended channel (email/mailing-list) and explicitly tells the agent when NOT to use it ('Not the web forum (get_discussion) or GitHub Discussions'), giving clear alternatives.

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

All canton-ccpedia 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

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Many tools have overlapping search/retrieval functionality (search, semantic_search, full_context, search_community, search_github_issues, etc.), and the CIP-specific variants (get_cip, get_cip_history, get_cip_votes, get_cip_mentions, get_cip_citations) are numerous and subtly differentiated. Despite cross-references in the descriptions, the boundaries are fine-grained and an agent is likely to misselect among the 8+ search tools or the 8+ CIP tools.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (get_x, list_x, search_x, find_x). Mixed styles or camelCase are absent, and the verb choice (get, list, search, find, detect, compare) is semantically appropriate to each action, making the naming highly predictable.

Tool Count1/5

With 88 tools, the surface is extremely overgrown for a single server, far exceeding the 25+ 'too many' threshold and approaching the 50+ 'extreme mismatch' category. Even for a comprehensive ecosystem knowledge base, this creates a massive selection burden and makes the tool set unwieldy for agents.

Completeness5/5

The server covers the full Canton ecosystem: docs, forum, mailing lists, GitHub, CIPs, governance, validators, versions, deprecations, security, and media. There are no glaring gaps in the knowledge domain; every major resource type has retrieval and analysis tools, making the coverage exhaustive with no obvious dead ends.

Resources