Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kani MCP Server

Kani MCP Server

by Alexxanddr
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

get_resource

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a single WaniKani resource by type and numeric ID, such as reviews, subjects, or assignments, to look up specific progress or reference data.

Instructions

Get one WaniKani resource by type and numeric ID

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": {
      "resource": "<resource>",
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "get_resource"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
resourceYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.4

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is available without the description. The description adds little behavioral context beyond confirming a single fetch; it does not mention errors, auth, or rate limits.

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?

It is a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every phrase contributes to identifying the tool's operation and inputs.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple read-only getter with rich annotations and an enum-bearing schema, the definition is usable but thin. With no output schema, it could say more about what is returned, and it gives no guidance on missing-ID or unknown-resource errors.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description maps the two required parameters to "type" and "numeric ID." The schema itself supplies the enum values and numeric constraints, so the description only minimally compensates for the missing parameter descriptions.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description states a specific verb and resource: "Get one WaniKani resource." It also distinguishes a single-resource fetch from the many list_* siblings via "one" and "by type and numeric ID," though it does not name an alternative directly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied: call this when you know the resource type and numeric ID. However, it does not explicitly say when to prefer this over list_* tools or what to do when only a collection is needed.

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