Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MeshMind

MeshMind

by AntoniovanDijck
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Retrieve original (uncompressed) context

retrieve_context

Recover the original, uncompressed text from a compressed reference returned by a prior optimized or compressed research call.

Instructions

Recover the original, uncompressed text for a ref returned by a prior get_optimized_context or compressed research call (reversible / CCR).

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": {
      "ref": "<ref>"
    },
    "name": "retrieve_context"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
refYesThe cf_… ref to recover.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool is reversible, implying a safe read operation, but does not disclose error behaviors, rate limits, or authentication needs. This is minimally adequate for a simple retrieval tool.

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?

The description is a single concise sentence, front-loaded with the action (recover) and key information. Every word contributes value; no wasted text.

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?

Given the tool has one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description sufficiently explains its purpose and relation to other tools. It lacks details on return values or error handling, but for a simple retrieval tool, it is fairly 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% for the single parameter 'ref', with a brief schema description. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool recovers the original uncompressed text for a ref returned by prior get_optimized_context or compressed research calls. It specifies the verb (recover), resource (uncompressed text), and source (ref), distinguishing it from siblings like get_optimized_context.

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?

The description explicitly indicates when to use the tool—after a prior get_optimized_context or compressed research call—and mentions it's reversible. However, it does not provide explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tools, though context makes it clear.

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