bettermode_get_spaceGet a single space by its id OR its slug (provide exactly one). Returns the space's name, slug, description, type, creation date, and member/post counts. Bettermode GraphQL query: space.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | No | The space's id. Provide this OR `slug`. | |
| slug | No | The space's URL slug. Provide this OR `id`. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true. The description adds context about return fields and the underlying GraphQL query, but does not detail any behavioral traits beyond what annotations imply. No contradictions.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, directly stating action, constraints, and return format. No wasted words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple read-only tool with two optional params and no output schema, the description covers purpose, constraint, and return fields. It could mention error cases or authentication, but is sufficient for this complexity.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds critical usage guidance ('provide exactly one') beyond the schema, which marks both as optional.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the action ('Get a single space') and specifies the identifier options (id or slug). It lists the return fields, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'list_spaces' which return multiple spaces.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
It explicitly says to provide exactly one of id or slug, which is a clear constraint. However, it does not directly contrast with alternatives like 'list_spaces' for when to use this vs. listing all spaces.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct resource and action: get vs list for members, posts, spaces, plus get_network and search. There is no ambiguity between tools.
All tools follow a uniform 'bettermode_verb_noun' pattern with lowercase snake_case. Verbs are consistently 'get', 'list', or 'search'.
With 8 tools, the server covers the essential read operations for a community platform without being overwhelming or too sparse.
The tool set is entirely read-only; there are no create, update, or delete operations for members, posts, or spaces, which are significant gaps for comprehensive community management.