Tessryx

Get app

get_app

Read-only

Get a single app by slug or id. Returns its metadata plus published_manifest — the TYPED selector of its last-published version (membership prefix rules + includes/excludes, and display), so you can read the app's shape from concrete fields. published_manifest is absent when the app is unpublished; to read/edit the raw definition body (draft or any version) use get_app_version.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`slug`	No	the app slug (provide this or app_id)
`app_id`	No	the app id (provide this or slug)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`slug`	Yes
`app_id`	Yes
`description`	Yes
`display_name`	Yes
`latest_version`	Yes
`published_manifest`	No
`last_published_version`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

First observedSep 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context: published_manifest is a typed selector, not the raw definition, and it is absent when the app is unpublished. This sets accurate expectations beyond the structured safety hints.

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?

Three sentences with no filler: the first states the action and resource, the second explains the key return-value behavior, and the third routes to the relevant sibling. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a read-only getter with a full output schema and complete parameter documentation, the description covers all decision points: what is returned, when published_manifest is absent, and which sibling to use for raw definition access. Nothing needed for correct invocation is missing.

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 each parameter description already explains the slug-or-app_id relationship. The description repeats this idea in prose but adds no new precedence, format, or combination semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource ('Get a single app by slug or id') and explains what is returned: metadata plus published_manifest. It clearly distinguishes itself from get_app_version by contrasting the typed selector with the raw definition body.

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?

Explicitly tells agents when to use this tool: when they need the metadata and typed published_manifest of the last-published version. It also names the alternative — get_app_version — for raw definition bodies and notes that published_manifest is absent for unpublished apps.

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

All Tessryx tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Every resource family follows the same verb+noun pattern and each tool name uniquely identifies a resource-action pair (create_app vs create_app_version vs update_app vs publish_app). Closest overlaps like analyze_resource vs get_resource_graph and patch_datafile vs update_datafile are explicitly differentiated by their descriptions, so misselection risk is low despite the scale.

Naming Consistency5/5

Names are almost uniformly verb_noun snake_case with a consistent lifecycle vocabulary: create/get/update/delete/list/publish/unpublish/version. Minor outliers like whoami and run_schedule_now are idiomatic and do not break the predictability of the set.

Tool Count1/5

At 93 tools this far exceeds the calibration's 50+ extreme-mismatch case. The count is inflated by repeating create/get/update/delete/version/publish/unpublish across ten resource families; even though each family is systematic, the combined surface is very hard for an agent to navigate and keep in context.

Completeness4/5

Core CRUD/publish/version lifecycles are present for apps, workflows, endpoints, schedules, schemas, datafiles, and api templates, and dependency analysis is well covered. However, secret creation/updating, asset upload, custom-domain deletion, and version-range enumeration for several resource types are absent or left to the external dashboard, so agents hit a few manual dead ends.

Resources

Need Help?