Skip to main content
Glama

Consulta JSONPath

json-path
Read-onlyIdempotent

Evalúa una consulta JSONPath (subconjunto de RFC 9535, con filtros) y devuelve valores y rutas. Cuándo: hay que transformar, comparar o revisar con exactitud datos estructurados (JSON, CSV, YAML, XML, arreglos). No para: leer el valor en una ruta como /clientes/0/nit dentro de un documento JSON con la sintaxis RFC 6901 (json-pointer-get). Efectos secundarios: ninguno (solo lectura, sin red, sin estado guardado). Determinista: la misma entrada da la misma salida. Límites: entrada JSON de hasta 64 KB, 1 s por llamada, resultado de hasta 1 MB.

EN: Evaluates a JSONPath query (RFC 9535 subset: .name, ['name'], [n], [*], .., [a:b:c], unions, filters with ==, !=, <, <=, >, >=, &&, ||, !) and returns matching values and their normalized paths. When: structured data (JSON, CSV, YAML, XML, arrays) has to be transformed, compared or checked exactly. [EN completo / full EN: inputSchema.description]

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYesJSONPath expression starting with $ (string; required; up to 1000 chars).
limitNoMax results (integer; optional; default 1000; min 1; max 10000).
valueYesJSON document (any JSON value; required).

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countNo
pathsNo
valuesNoany JSON value

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / path / examples
      Added value: +[
      +  "$[-2:]"
      +]
    • addedInput schema / properties / value / examples
      Added value: +[
      +  [
      +    1,
      +    2,
      +    3,
      +    4,
      +    5
      +  ]
      +]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / description
      Added value: +"EN: Evaluates a JSONPath query (RFC 9535 subset: .name, ['name'], [n], [*], .., [a:b:c], unions, filters with ==, !=, <, <=, >, >=, &&, ||, !) and returns matching values and their normalized paths. When: structured data (JSON, CSV, YAML, XML, arrays) has to be transformed, compared or checked exactly. Not for: reading the value at a path such as /clientes/0/nit inside a JSON document using RFC 6901 syntax (json-pointer-get). Side effects: none (read-only, no network access, no stored state). Deterministic: the same input gives the same output. Limits: JSON input up to 64 KB, 1 s per call, result up to 1 MB."
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-open-world, and the description adds concrete behavioral facts beyond them: no side effects, no network, no stored state, deterministic output, and hard limits (64 KB input, 1 s per call, 1 MB result). No contradiction with the safety 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?

Front-loaded with purpose then labeled sections (When / Not for / Side effects / Limits) in the Spanish text, so scanning is easy. The full English restatement roughly doubles the length and repeats content, which costs some conciseness.

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?

For a read-only query tool with an output schema, full param coverage, and rich annotations, the description covers purpose, routing, limits, and determinism. Nothing an agent needs to invoke 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?

Schema coverage is 100% so both required params are documented structurally; the description adds value by enumerating the supported JSONPath operator subset (.name, ['name'], [n], [*], .., [a:b:c], unions, filters) and size/time limits. It stops short of detailing the `limit` interaction with result truncation.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Evalúa una consulta JSONPath') plus scope (RFC 9535 subset with filters) and the return shape (values + normalized paths). It explicitly names json-pointer-get as the sibling it is not, letting an agent discriminate without opening either schema.

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?

Provides an explicit 'Cuándo' block (transform, compare, check structured data: JSON/CSV/YAML/XML/arrays) and an explicit 'No para' block naming json-pointer-get for RFC 6901 path reads. When-to-use, when-not, and the alternative are all present.

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.

Resources