Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Nopaque TotalPath

by uk.co.nopaque
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get Run Results

getRunResults
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get any test run (standard/param/mission/compliance) by id, including per-step results: outcome, transcript, similarity scores, words. Use when you need per-step breakdowns OR when you do not know if the run is mission or standard. For mission-specific shape (verdict, evidence, judgeReasoning) prefer getMissionTestRun. For listing across runs use listTestRuns; for counts use aggregateTestRuns. Returns 404 cross-workspace.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "getRunResults"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesTest run identifier.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a genuine operational constraint not in the annotations – "Returns 404 cross-workspace" – plus what the per-step payload contains, though that overlaps with the output schema. Not a contradiction, and the cross-workspace failure mode is real added value.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and payload, followed by selection rules and routing to siblings; every sentence carries routing or constraint information. The enumeration of return fields (outcome, transcript, similarity scores, words) is partially redundant with the existing output schema, which is the only wasted weight.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool is simple (one uuid parameter) and has an output schema, so return shape needn't be spelled out. The description still covers selection criteria, sibling alternatives, and a cross-workspace failure mode, leaving little an agent needs missing – only the redundant return-field list keeps it from a 5.

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?

With a single required parameter at 100% schema description coverage, the schema already defines `id` fully (uuid format, "Test run identifier"). The description adds only the qualifier "by id" and the run-type scope, which is modest value beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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 any test run ... by id") and enumerates the run types it covers (standard/param/mission/compliance) along with the per-step payload. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from getMissionTestRun and listTestRuns, so an agent can choose without opening schemas.

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 two positive selection conditions ("when you need per-step breakdowns OR when you do not know if the run is mission or standard") and names the alternatives for adjacent needs: getMissionTestRun for mission-specific shape, listTestRuns for listing, aggregateTestRuns for counts. When-to-use, when-to-prefer-another, and routing are all explicit.

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

All Nopaque TotalPath toolsInspect
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