Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Arsel MCP Server

Arsel MCP Server

Official
by Arsel-SA
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Get Segment

get-segment
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a segment's status, last contact count, and filter in create/update-compatible format. Use list-contacts with segment_id to view its members.

Instructions

Get one segment: its status, its last contact count and its filter, in the format create-segment and update-segment accept. To see its members, call list-contacts with segment_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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "get-segment"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe segment id.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.2.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive, yet the description still adds real value: it names the exact fields returned and notes the filter is in the format create-segment and update-segment accept, which signals round-trip safety. It does not cover error behavior for a missing id, a minor gap.

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, zero filler, with the primary capability and the returned fields front-loaded before the sibling routing hint.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a single-record read with full annotations, one documented parameter, and no output schema, the description supplies what the missing output schema would have: the notable return fields. Nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly is absent.

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?

Only one parameter, and the schema documents it fully at 100% coverage including UUID format and pattern. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond that, so the schema does the heavy lifting and baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Get one segment") and enumerates the returned fields (status, last contact count, filter), which distinguishes it from sibling list-contacts, which returns members instead.

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 routes the agent: to see members, call list-contacts with segment_id, and implies round-tripping with create-segment/update-segment. No explicit "do not use for..." exclusion, but no plausible competing use case exists among the named siblings.

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