Anakin

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

wire_read_action

Read-only

Execute read-only extraction actions to retrieve listings, product details, prices, reviews, profiles, or metrics without modifying the target site.

Instructions

Run a Wire READ action — one whose type is "read" (it EXTRACTS data and does not change state on the target site): search listings, fetch a category's products, get a product's price/specs/reviews, read a profile, pull dashboard metrics. Discover action_ids first with wire_discover or wire_catalog and confirm the action's type is "read"; params must match that action's parameter schema. This tool transparently polls the async job to completion and returns the extracted data. Most read actions need no auth; if the action's auth_mode is "required" (e.g. reading data behind a login), pass a credential_id from wire_identities or wire_login. For state-changing actions (type "write") use wire_write_action instead.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`params`	No	The action's input parameters. Shape depends on the action — use its parameter schema from discovery. Omit for actions that take none.
`action_id`	Yes	The action to run (from wire_discover / wire_catalog).
`identity_id`	No	Optional identity selector — the server resolves a credential from it (alternative to credential_id).
`credential_id`	No	Required when the action's auth_mode is "required"; honored when "optional"; ignored when "none". Get one from wire_identities or wire_login.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`data`	No	Present when completed — the action's extracted/returned data.
`status`	Yes
`credits_used`	No
`execution_ms`	No
`retry_after_ms`	No	Present while processing — server's suggested poll delay.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.4.1Sep 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations' readOnlyHint=true, the description adds that the tool EXTRACTS data and does not change state, and that it 'transparently polls the async job to completion and returns the extracted data.' It also discloses auth behavior. It does not contradict the annotations, though it omits failure or timeout behavior, so it is not a 5.

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?

The description is front-loaded with purpose, then flows through discovery, params, auth, and the write-action alternative. The example list is slightly long but each clause carries meaningful guidance; there is no filler, though some redundancy with the readOnly annotation could be trimmed.

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?

For a generic action runner, the description covers discovery, type confirmation, param matching, auth, async polling, and sibling routing. With a rich output schema present, it does not need to describe return values. It omits identity_id as an alternative auth path, but the schema covers that, so this is largely complete.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage and already documents action_id, params, identity_id, and credential_id with conditional auth semantics. The description adds that most read actions need no auth and that params must match the action's schema, but this largely restates the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

The description states 'Run a Wire READ action' and enumerates concrete examples (search listings, fetch category products, get price/specs/reviews, read profile, pull metrics), making the operation and resource unambiguous. It also distinguishes from the closest sibling by explicitly routing state-changing actions to wire_write_action.

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?

It gives explicit when-to-use steps: discover action_ids first with wire_discover or wire_catalog, confirm the action's type is 'read', and ensure params match the action's schema. It also directly states the when-not case—'For state-changing actions (type "write") use wire_write_action instead'—and provides auth prerequisites for actions with auth_mode 'required'.

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