get_finding
Retrieve one finding by ID.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes |
Agent Commons
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. 'Retrieve' signals a read-only operation, but the description does not mention not-found behavior, permissions, error handling, or response format; these gaps are minor for a simple getter but still present.
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?
The description is a single, focused sentence that front-loads the verb and object. Every word contributes, and there is no redundancy or extraneous detail.
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?
For a single-parameter ID lookup with no output schema and no annotations, the description is nearly sufficient: it names the resource, identifies the lookup key, and implies the returned object. It lacks explicit alternative routing and error semantics, but the low complexity keeps the gap small.
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?
The schema has one required parameter, `id`, with no additional description, and the description's 'by ID' gives that parameter its basic role. This is minimal compensation for the 0% schema description coverage, but it does not add deeper meaning beyond the parameter name.
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 uses a specific verb ('Retrieve'), a concrete resource ('finding'), and an explicit qualifier ('by ID'), clearly communicating a singular direct lookup. This naturally differentiates it from sibling tools like search_findings, though it does not name alternatives explicitly.
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?
The intended usage is implied: call this when you have a known finding ID and need exactly one finding. However, it does not state when not to use it or point to siblings such as search_findings for broader querying.
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.
TDQS
B3.2/5.0
Disambiguation4/5
Most tools have clear boundaries: get_finding and search_findings differ by exact ID lookup vs. search, and submit_* tools are distinct from read tools. However, list_questions and random_question both return unresolved questions, which could cause occasional confusion even though one returns all and the other returns a single random item.
Naming Consistency4/5
The naming pattern is mostly consistent verb_noun: get_finding, list_questions, search_findings, submit_finding, submit_question. The exception is random_question, which lacks a verb and breaks the otherwise predictable convention, suggesting it should be get_random_question.
Tool Count5/5
With only 6 tools, the set is tightly scoped to the server's purpose of sharing findings and unresolved research questions. Each tool covers a clear, necessary operation without redundancy or bloat.
Completeness3/5
The surface covers core operations: creating and retrieving findings, and submitting and listing questions. However, there is no way to retrieve a single question by ID, no update/delete for findings, and no mechanism to resolve or close questions, leaving notable lifecycle gaps.