Skip to main content
Glama

RationalBloks

by io.github.rationalbloks
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get Project Schema

get_schema
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get the JSON schema definition of a project in FLAT format. Returns the schema structure where each table name maps directly to field definitions. This is the same format required for create_project and update_schema. USE CASES: Review current schema before making updates, copy schema as template for new projects, verify schema structure after deployment, learn the correct schema format by example. The returned schema will be in FLAT format: {table_name: {field_name: {type, properties}}}. The response also says whether this saved schema is the deployed one: saved_schema_deployed is true when the last deploy applied it, false when it was saved after the last deploy (undeployed_changes then lists what deploying it would change), and null when no deployed schema is on record. A LARGE SCHEMA: pass tables or fields to read only the part you are about to change — the answer's 'version' is the whole schema's either way, so a slice is enough to patch it with patch_schema(expected_version=...).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fieldsNoRead only these fields, each written 'table.field' (e.g. ["parameters.is_clock"]); their table's own keys come with them.
tablesNoRead only these tables, whole (e.g. ["parameters"]). A table the schema does not hold is refused.
project_idYesProject ID (UUID)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / fields
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Read only these fields, each written 'table.field' (e.g. [\"parameters.is_clock\"]); their table's own keys come with them.",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / tables
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Read only these tables, whole (e.g. [\"parameters\"]). A table the schema does not hold is refused.",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only/idempotent behavior, and the description adds materially: the FLAT representation, saved_schema_deployed tri-state semantics, undeployed_changes behavior, and the fact that version is whole-schema even when a slice is requested. This goes well beyond what annotations alone convey.

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 front-loaded with purpose and format, then moves to use cases, response semantics, and large-schema guidance – all valuable. Some redundancy ('FLAT format' stated twice, a four-item use-case list that partly overlaps) keeps it from a 5.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Without an output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining return values, and it does: schema object shape, saved_schema_deployed, undeployed_changes, and version semantics. For a 3-parameter read-only tool, nothing necessary to call it correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Input schema covers each parameter at 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds strategic meaning for tables/fields: slice the schema for large projects, and any slice's version remains the whole schema's version, which is enough to feed patch_schema. That is meaning the schema descriptions do not provide.

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 names an exact verb+resource ('get the JSON schema definition of a project in FLAT format') and explains the output shape, so an agent knows what operation this is. It is less explicit than ideal at differentiating from siblings like get_schema_at_version or get_graph_schema: it implies 'current/saved' schema but never names the alternatives.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Four explicit use cases (review before updates, copy as template, verify after deploy, learn by example) tell the agent when to invoke this tool. It does not give exclusions or mention alternatives such as get_schema_at_version for historical schemas, so it misses the top of the scale.

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

All RationalBloks toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources