Skip to main content
Glama
DecisionPen MCP Server

DecisionPen MCP Server

Official
by DecisionPen

batch_get_entities

Fetches details for up to 50 comma-separated entity IDs in one call, enabling you to hydrate peers from relationships and enrich map-grounded context.

Instructions

Hydrate many entity ids (e.g. peers from relationships). entity_ids: comma-separated ids (max 50).

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": {
      "entity_ids": "<entity_ids>"
    },
    "name": "batch_get_entities"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
entity_idsYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses one real constraint (max 50 ids), but says nothing about partial results when some ids are unknown, ordering of the response, deduplication, or whether a missing id errors out. Key read-safety context is assumed rather than stated.

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?

Two short lines, front-loaded with the action, followed immediately by the encoding rule for the one parameter. No wasted words; the only mild cost is that the terseness leaves the term "hydrate" unexplained.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and with one required parameter the surface area is small. Format and batch limit are covered; what remains missing is failure semantics for invalid or unknown ids, which for a simple read tool is a minor rather than fatal omission.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0% (the only field is titled "Entity Ids"), so the description must compensate, and it does: it specifies comma-separated encoding and a maximum of 50 ids. It stops short of showing an id format or example value, which is the only remaining gap for a single-parameter tool.

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?

"Hydrate many entity ids" gives a specific verb (fetch full records for a batch) and resource (entities), and the word "many" implicitly sets it apart from the single-record get_entity sibling. The jargon "hydrate" is not defined, but the parenthetical example makes the intent recoverable.

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?

The parenthetical "e.g. peers from relationships" shows one concrete situation where the tool applies, but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over get_entity or search_entities, nor any exclusion such as 'do not use when you have a single id'. Usage is implied rather than stated.

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