Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
cmcp

cmcp

by DeveshB-1
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Utilities/Streamed Response

utilities_streamed_response
Read-only

Streams chunked HTTP responses of configurable length so clients can process partial data before the server finishes generating the full response.

Instructions

This endpoint allows one to receive streaming http response using chunked transfer encoding of a configurable length.

A streaming response does not wait for the entire response to be generated on server before flushing it out. This implies that for a fairly large response, parts of it can be streamed to the requestee as and when it is generated on server. The client can then take actions of processing this partially received data.

(Postman request: Utilities/Streamed Response | GET https://postman-echo.com/stream/10)

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "utilities_streamed_response"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavior beyond annotations: the server flushes partial data as it is generated, the client can process partial results, and chunked transfer encoding is used.

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 purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by a concise explanation of why streaming matters. The Postman request example adds concrete context, though the second paragraph is somewhat tutorial-like and could be tighter.

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?

With no output schema and no parameters, the description provides enough context to understand that this is a read-only echo-style streaming endpoint and that data arrives incrementally. It could say more about the exact response body or stream termination, but the essential behavior is covered.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description's mention of 'configurable length' is not actionable through any exposed parameter, but no parameter semantics are required for this empty schema.

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?

The description states a specific action and resource: receiving a streaming HTTP response using chunked transfer encoding. It is clearly distinct from most utility siblings because it emphasizes streaming behavior, though it does not explicitly name alternatives such as the regular GET request tool.

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?

Usage is implied: this is for cases where a client wants to process a response incrementally rather than waiting for completion. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance or direct comparison with request_methods_get_request or the gzip/deflate response utilities.

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