Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@aiwerk/mcp-server-elevenlabs

@aiwerk/mcp-server-elevenlabs

by AIWerk
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

get_agent_summaries_route

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch summaries for specified ElevenLabs agents by ID. Get key details for multiple agents in one request.

Instructions

Get Agent Summaries

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": {
      "agent_ids": "<agent_ids>"
    },
    "name": "get_agent_summaries_route"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
agent_idsYesList of agent IDs to fetch summaries for

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that — no note on batching behavior, per-ID error handling, or what happens for unknown/inaccessible agent IDs.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

It is short, but conciseness here reflects under-specification rather than efficiency — a two-word phrase that restates the title earns no informational place. There is no front-loaded detail to guide invocation.

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

Completeness2/5

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

The tool is simple, with full schema coverage and annotations on safety, so the description needn't explain return values. Still, for a batch-fetch route it should clarify that summaries are returned per requested agent ID, which is left entirely implicit.

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?

There is only one parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents agent_ids fully. Baseline 3 applies since the description contributes no additional meaning about ID format, batch limits, or ordering.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Get Agent Summaries' is essentially a restatement of the tool name with no added specificity. It does not distinguish this route from close siblings such as get_agent_route, get_agents_route, or get_agent_response_tests_summaries_route, nor does it explain what a 'summary' contains.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No indication of when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no mention of the batch/multi-ID nature implied by the required agent_ids array. The agent must infer all routing decisions from the name alone.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools