Tessryx

Get dynamic endpoint

get_dynamic_endpoint

Read-only

Get a single dynamic endpoint by slug or id, including its public URL and the definition body of its current version (published if any, else latest). Use get_dynamic_endpoint_version to read a specific older version.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`slug`	No	the endpoint slug (provide this or endpoint_id)
`endpoint_id`	No	the endpoint id (provide this or slug)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`slug`	Yes
`version`	No
`definition`	No
`public_url`	No
`description`	Yes
`endpoint_id`	Yes
`content_type`	Yes
`display_name`	Yes
`latest_version`	Yes
`last_published_version`	Yes

Schema Changelog

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

First observedSep 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint, so safety is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by disclosing that the returned definition body is from the current version, choosing 'published if any, else latest' — a non-obvious selection rule an agent needs to know.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The core purpose and return behavior are front-loaded, and the routing to get_dynamic_endpoint_version is a single useful addition without redundancy.

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 single-endpoint retrieval tool with two optional parameters, an output schema, and safety annotations, the description is complete. It covers current-version semantics and names the sibling for older versions, so an agent has everything needed to invoke this tool appropriately.

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%, with both slug and endpoint_id fully described as alternatives. The description briefly restates 'by slug or id' but adds no new semantics, such as precedence if both are provided. The schema carries the parameter documentation, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb-resource pair: 'Get a single dynamic endpoint by slug or id', which immediately distinguishes it from listing tools like list_dynamic_endpoints. It further clarifies what is returned (public URL and current-version definition body), and explicitly separates it from get_dynamic_endpoint_version for older versions.

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?

The description states when to use the tool: reading one dynamic endpoint's current version. It explicitly directs agents to get_dynamic_endpoint_version for specific older versions, providing a clear exclusion. It doesn't mention list_dynamic_endpoints for multi-endpoint retrieval, but 'single' makes that distinction reasonably clear.

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?