HelpCenter.io

Get HelpCenter Article

helpcenter_get_article

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read one article by id from the connected HelpCenter.io help center.

Use this when you already know the id — after a search, or before editing — instead of paging through helpcenter_list_articles to find it again. Read-only.

Also the way to check whether an article has unpublished staged edits waiting on it: the response carries has_staged_changes, staged_locales and staged_updated_at. Check that before a live update, or your edit and somebody else's staged work will collide.

Args:

article_id (number, required): id of the article.
response_format ('markdown' | 'json'): default 'markdown'.

Returns: { status: "success", article: {...} } — the full article, including per-language title/content/slug, categories, external_id, and the staged-changes flags.

Errors: 404 if the id is unknown OR belongs to another help center — the endpoint deliberately does not distinguish the two, so a 404 is not proof the article does not exist somewhere else.

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": {
      "article_id": "<article_id>"
    },
    "name": "helpcenter_get_article"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`site_id`	No	Which help center to act on: an id from helpcenter_list_sites. Needed when this connection reaches more than one help center; omit it when it reaches one. Applies to this call only — pass it on every call of a task, and ask the user which help center they mean if their request does not say.
`article_id`	Yes	Id of the article to read.
`response_format`	No	Output format: 'markdown' for a human-readable summary or 'json' for the full structured payload.	markdown

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 4, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (which only say read-only/idempotent), it discloses the staged-changes fields carried in the response, warns about a concurrency collision with another author's staged work, and explains that a 404 deliberately conflates a missing id with an id from another help center. Those are non-obvious behaviors an agent cannot infer from structured fields.

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?

The core guidance is front-loaded and tight, and the staged-changes warning plus 404 caveat are well placed. The trailing Args block largely duplicates the input schema, which is low-value padding.

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?

With no output schema, the description still explains the return envelope, the article fields, and the staged-changes flags, and it covers error semantics. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing; multi-site routing is handled by the schema's site_id description.

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 coverage is 100%, and the description's Args block only restates article_id and response_format without adding syntax or meaning; site_id is left entirely to the schema, which documents it more fully than the description does. Baseline 3 applies because the schema does all the semantic work.

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 ("Read one article by id from the connected HelpCenter.io help center") and explicitly contrasts itself with helpcenter_list_articles, so an agent can distinguish it from the listing and search siblings immediately.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives an explicit when-to-use condition ("when you already know the id — after a search, or before editing"), names the alternative it replaces (paging through helpcenter_list_articles), and adds a second distinct use case: pre-checking staged changes before a live update.

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

All HelpCenter.io tools Inspect

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

Need Help?