Skip to main content
Glama

claude-faf-mcp

by io.github.Wolfe-Jam
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get Context Soul

get_soul
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch a context soul by name. Returns structured AI context.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
soulYesSoul identifier (e.g., "spacex", "wolfe", "grok")

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "content": {
-      "items": {
-        "properties": {
-          "text": {
-            "description": "Human-readable tool result.",
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "type": {
-            "const": "text",
-            "type": "string"
-          }
-        },
-        "required": [
-          "type",
-          "text"
-        ],
-        "type": "object"
-      },
-      "type": "array"
-    },
-    "isError": {
-      "description": "True when the tool failed.",
-      "type": "boolean"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "content",
-    "isError"
-  ],
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "content": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "text": {
+            "description": "Human-readable tool result.",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": {
+            "const": "text",
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "type",
+          "text"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "isError": {
+      "description": "True when the tool failed.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "content",
+    "isError"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already disclose readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds that the result is structured AI context, which is useful, but does not discuss what happens when a soul is not found or any return format details. 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.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is only two sentences and is front-loaded with the primary action. The second sentence about structured context is useful but somewhat vague, making it earn its place without being redundant.

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 single-parameter tool with strong annotations and full schema coverage, the description is nearly sufficient. However it does not explain what a 'soul' is, provide context about the returned 'structured AI context', or mention any edge cases, while there is no output schema to fill those gaps.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100% for the single 'soul' parameter, including examples like 'spacex'. The description's 'by name' aligns with the schema's 'identifier' and adds no new semantic meaning beyond what the schema already documents, so the 100% coverage baseline of 3 applies.

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?

The description uses a specific verb ('Fetch'), a resource ('a context soul'), and a selection mechanism ('by name'), which clearly states the core action. It is distinguishable from the faf_* sibling tools, though the term 'soul' is never defined, preventing a perfect score.

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 name/identifier' implies that this tool is for retrieving a known soul rather than searching or discovering one, which is a legitimate implicit usage signal. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this over siblings or when not to use it.

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

All claude-faf-mcp toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources