Skip to main content
Glama

Get scaffold

get_scaffold
Idempotent

Refetches a scaffold you purchased (fresh clone command), no extra credits. Credit-flow projects need Maintain on. Same site_profile/delivery options as purchase_scaffold.

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": {
      "projectid": "<projectid>"
    },
    "name": "get_scaffold"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
deliveryNo"clone" (default) or "inline".
projectidYesThe project id from a previous purchase_scaffold result. Required — your project is resolved from your authenticated account.
site_profileNofalse/omit: skip. true: attach this account's one site profile (errors if 0 or >1). A string: attach that named profile.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / delivery / description
      Previous value: -"\"clone\" (default): git clone command. \"inline\": files in the reply. No git needed. More tokens."New value: +"\"clone\" (default) or \"inline\"."
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / project_api_key
      Removed value: -{
      -  "description": "The project API key returned by purchase_scaffold (starts with \"sk_\"). Required.",
      -  "type": "string"
      -}
    • changedInput schema / properties / projectid / description
      Previous value: -"The project id from a previous purchase_scaffold result."New value: +"The project id from a previous purchase_scaffold result. Required — your project is resolved from your authenticated account."
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "project_api_key"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "projectid"
      +]
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  4. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / site_profile
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "false/omit: skip. true: attach this account's one site profile (errors if 0 or >1). A string: attach that named profile.",
      +  "type": [
      +    "boolean",
      +    "string"
      +  ]
      +}
    • removedInput schema / properties / siteprofile
      Removed value: -{
      -  "type": [
      -    "boolean",
      -    "string"
      -  ]
      -}
  5. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / delivery
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "\"clone\" (default): git clone command. \"inline\": files in the reply. No git needed. More tokens.",
      +  "enum": [
      +    "clone",
      +    "inline"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  6. Added

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare idempotency, non-destructiveness, and open-world behavior, so the bar is lower. The description adds useful non-annotation context: no extra credits are consumed and credit-flow projects require Maintain on.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core refetch behavior and credit implication. Every sentence carries relevant information without repetition.

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?

Covers what the tool returns at a high level ('fresh clone command'), the credit implication, and a key prerequisite for credit-flow projects. With no output schema and fully documented parameters in the schema, this is nearly complete, though it could explicitly clarify the alternative to verify_scaffold.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents projectid, delivery, and site_profile in detail. The description only cross-references that site_profile/delivery options match purchase_scaffold, adding little beyond the schema baseline.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: refetches a purchased scaffold via a fresh clone command. The phrase 'you purchased' and 'no extra credits' implicitly distinguishes it from purchase_scaffold, but it does not explicitly name or differentiate from verify_scaffold.

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?

Provides prerequisite context ('Credit-flow projects need Maintain on') and signals this is for previously purchased scaffolds. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this versus purchase_scaffold or verify_scaffold, leaving the alternative routing implied.

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.