Skip to main content
Glama

Flood Design System

Read Flood material

read_flood
Read-onlyIdempotent

Read one public material by ID. Omit length for up to 10,000 characters. Continue with nextOffset when present. Required prerequisites are listed separately from related materials.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "read_flood"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
lengthNoOptional page size; maximum 12,000 characters.
offsetNo
linksOffsetNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already establish that this is a safe, idempotent, read-only operation. The description adds some behavioral context about pagination and default length, but the nextOffset reference conflicts with the schema and the prerequisites sentence is vague.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is short and mostly front-loaded, but the final sentence about required prerequisites is unclear and does not earn its place.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a tool with four parameters, low schema coverage, and no output schema, the description leaves important parameter semantics and pagination behavior underspecified. The nextOffset mismatch adds confusion rather than resolving it.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 25%, so the description needs to carry more weight. It mentions length and nextOffset, but the schema exposes offset and linksOffset instead, and it does not explain the required id pattern or the other pagination parameters.

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 states a specific verb and resource: read one public material by ID. This clearly distinguishes the tool from a search-style sibling, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

It gives pagination guidance via length and nextOffset, implying iterative reads. However, it does not explain when to use this tool instead of search_flood or flood_info.

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.