thinkhard.si prompt tools

Get a prompt template

get_prompt

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get the full text of one prompt from the thinkhard.si repository by its slug, registry number (such as CAR-001) or exact title, with its {{blanks}}, what goes in each, and why it works. If the name does not match exactly, it answers with the closest matches instead. Pass values to fill blanks with the user's details. Ask the user for any blank you cannot fill from the conversation instead of inventing it.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`prompt`	Yes	The slug, registry number or exact title from search_prompts.
`values`	No	Optional: blank name → the user's text, for example {"job_posting": "..."}.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Registry number.
`url`	Yes
`slug`	Yes
`title`	Yes
`prompt`	Yes	The user message, with the given values filled in.
`system`	Yes	The system prompt, with the given values filled in. Empty when the template has none.
`open_blanks`	Yes	Blanks still to fill. Ask the user for these.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 23, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / prompt / description

Previous value: -"The slug, registry number or title from search_prompts."New value: +"The slug, registry number or exact title from search_prompts."

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "id": {
+      "description": "Registry number.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "open_blanks": {
+      "description": "Blanks still to fill. Ask the user for these.",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "prompt": {
+      "description": "The user message, with the given values filled in.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "slug": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "system": {
+      "description": "The system prompt, with the given values filled in. Empty when the template has none.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "title": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "url": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "id",
+    "slug",
+    "title",
+    "system",
+    "prompt",
+    "open_blanks",
+    "url"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare a safe, idempotent, closed-world read, so the bar is lower; the description still adds real behavior: the response includes blanks, what goes in each, and why the prompt works, and a non-matching lookup returns nearest matches instead of failing. The one gap is that it does not say what an empty match set looks like.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the retrieval action, then the identifier options and fallback, then the blank-filling rule. No redundant restatement of schema or annotations.

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?

Covers retrieval key formats, near-miss behavior, the blank-filling contract, and the anti-hallucination instruction, which is everything needed to call it correctly. An output schema exists, so return-value structure need not be described.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description clarifies that `prompt` accepts a slug, registry number, or exact title, and that `values` are the user's details used to fill the {{blanks}}. It also adds the important constraint that unfulfillable blanks should be asked about, not fabricated.

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 ("Get the full text of one prompt") plus the distinct lookup keys (slug, registry number like CAR-001, exact title). It is clearly differentiated from the sibling search_prompts, which returns multiple results, while this returns a single prompt with its blanks and rationale.

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?

Explains the three acceptable identifiers, the near-miss fallback ("answers with the closest matches instead"), and instructs the agent to ask the user rather than invent blank values. It does not explicitly name search_prompts as the prerequisite discovery step in the description itself, leaving that to the schema text.

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

All thinkhard.si prompt tools tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?