Skip to main content
Glama

Raziel

by io.github.tide-foundation
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

tide_skill

Read-only

Read a composable skill definition

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesSkill name. Available: grc-review, tide-diagnostics, tide-integration, tide-learning-capture, tide-mcp-qa, tide-rbac-and-e2ee, tide-red-team, tide-reviewer, tide-route-and-api-protection, tide-scenario-resolver, tide-security-analyst, tide-setup, tide-solutions-architect
partNoWhich part to return when the document is delivered in several parts. Omit for part 1; the response says how many there are.
sectionNoReturn only the section(s) whose heading contains this text, e.g. 'AP-62' or 'T-26'. Use it when another document points you at one entry.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / part
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Which part to return when the document is delivered in several parts. Omit for part 1; the response says how many there are.",
+  "minimum": 1,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / section
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Return only the section(s) whose heading contains this text, e.g. 'AP-62' or 'T-26'. Use it when another document points you at one entry.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Previous value: -"Skill name. Available: tide-diagnostics, tide-integration, tide-learning-capture, tide-mcp-qa, tide-rbac-and-e2ee, tide-red-team, tide-reviewer, tide-route-and-api-protection, tide-scenario-resolver, tide-security-analyst, tide-setup, tide-solutions-architect"New value: +"Skill name. Available: grc-review, tide-diagnostics, tide-integration, tide-learning-capture, tide-mcp-qa, tide-rbac-and-e2ee, tide-red-team, tide-reviewer, tide-route-and-api-protection, tide-scenario-resolver, tide-security-analyst, tide-setup, tide-solutions-architect"
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Previous value: -"Skill name. Available: tide-diagnostics, tide-integration, tide-learning-capture, tide-mcp-qa, tide-rbac-and-e2ee, tide-reviewer, tide-route-and-api-protection, tide-scenario-resolver, tide-security-analyst, tide-setup, tide-solutions-architect"New value: +"Skill name. Available: tide-diagnostics, tide-integration, tide-learning-capture, tide-mcp-qa, tide-rbac-and-e2ee, tide-red-team, tide-reviewer, tide-route-and-api-protection, tide-scenario-resolver, tide-security-analyst, tide-setup, tide-solutions-architect"
  4. First observed

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that - no note on pagination behavior, document size, or what a returned skill contains.

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?

A single efficient sentence with zero waste and the core action front-loaded. It is arguably under-specified, but there is no padding to trim.

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 simple read tool with full schema coverage and annotations covering safety, the structured fields carry most of the load. The description still leaves the agent guessing about output pagination and the scope of a 'skill', and there is no output schema to compensate.

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%; the name param even enumerates the available skills and the part/section params are well documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter semantics of its own, so 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 clear verb ("Read") and resource ("composable skill definition"), so the agent knows it retrieves a document. However, it offers no differentiation from siblings like tide_list or tide_scenario, which could also plausibly return skill-related content.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives. The schema hints at pagination and section filtering, but the description gives the agent nothing about when to reach for this tool versus its many siblings.

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

All Raziel 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