Skip to main content
Glama

Show one To-do with its steps and evidence

get_todo
Read-only

Use this when someone wants the details of one To-do: why it matters, the steps to do it, and the evidence behind it.

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": {
      "todo_id": "<todo_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_todo"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
brandNoWhich brand, by name or id, when the account tracks more than one. Leave empty to use the only brand; list_brands shows them all.
todo_idYesThe To-do id, from list_todos.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered elsewhere. Because there is no output schema, the description's enumeration of returned content (rationale, steps, evidence) carries some real weight, but it largely restates the title rather than disclosing new behavior such as not-found handling.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that packs the trigger condition and the return contents with no filler or repetition.

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 simple read-only single-record lookup with fully documented parameters and annotations covering the safety profile, the description supplies exactly what the agent needs. With no output schema, it usefully previews the returned fields.

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%: todo_id and brand are both documented in the schema, including where each value comes from. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb/resource ('details of one To-do') and enumerates what the resource contains (why it matters, steps, evidence), so an agent can distinguish it from list_todos by the singular scoping. It does not name list_todos explicitly, so differentiation is inferred rather than spelled out.

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?

'Use this when someone wants the details of one To-do' gives a usable trigger condition, but there is no explicit when-not guidance and no named alternative (e.g., list_todos for browsing, or a sibling like get_site_audit for other resources). Usage is implied by the singular scope rather than stated against alternatives.

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