Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Rosetta MCP Server

Rosetta MCP Server

by Arielbs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

get_rosetta_web_doc

Read-only

Extract clean text from any Rosetta documentation page by providing its URL. Use after searching to read the specific documentation you need.

Instructions

Fetch and extract text from a specific Rosetta docs URL. Use after search_rosetta_web_docs to read a documentation page.

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": {
      "url": "<url>"
    },
    "name": "get_rosetta_web_doc"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesFull URL to a Rosetta docs page
max_charsNoMax characters of cleaned text to return (default 4000)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.3.1

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. Description adds 'Fetch and extract text' but no additional behavioral details (e.g., rate limits, error cases). With annotations, a 3 is appropriate.

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?

Two sentences: first states action, second provides usage context. No filler, every sentence earns its place.

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's simplicity (2 params, no output schema), description covers purpose and usage adequately. Could mention return format, but not critical. Almost 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 coverage is 100% with clear parameter descriptions. The tool description adds no extra parameter information, so baseline 3.

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?

Description clearly states 'Fetch and extract text from a specific Rosetta docs URL' with a specific verb and resource, and differentiates from sibling 'search_rosetta_web_docs' by indicating post-search usage.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use after search_rosetta_web_docs to read a documentation page', providing clear context. Does not list exclusions, but the guidance is sufficient for typical use.

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