Skip to main content
Glama

Open a wiki

open_wiki
Read-onlyIdempotent

Orient yourself in one wiki, in a single call: returns its metadata, scope (coverage / not-covered / freshness), document count, the entry document, and a map of all documents (paths + titles, grouped by folder) so you can pick what to read_document next. Use a slug from list_wikis.

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": {
      "wiki": "<wiki>"
    },
    "name": "open_wiki"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
wikiYesWiki slug, e.g. "hermes".

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the bar is lower. The description adds real value by disclosing the return surface, including the `scope` breakdown and the grouped map, but says nothing about size limits, truncation on large wikis, or failure behavior for an invalid slug.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with a colon introducing the return payload, closing with the next-action pointer. No filler, and the orientation purpose precedes the enumeration.

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

Completeness4/5

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

No output schema exists, so the description must carry the return-shape burden, and it does so thoroughly. The remaining gap is edge-case behavior (invalid slug, very large wikis), which is minor for a single-parameter read tool.

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?

With a single parameter at 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3; the description earns a bump by explaining where the slug comes from (list_wikis). It doesn't add format details beyond the schema's example, but little more is needed for one string.

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 ("Orient yourself in one wiki") and then enumerates the exact payload: metadata, scope, document count, entry document, and a folder-grouped map of documents. That enumeration clearly separates it from read_document (single doc) and list_wikis (slug discovery).

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?

Gives the prerequisite explicitly ("Use a slug from list_wikis") and the downstream step ("pick what to read_document next"), which places it correctly in a discover-then-read workflow. It doesn't state any when-not-to-use condition, so it stops short of a 5.

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.