Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
asset-finder-mcp

asset-finder-mcp

by Erfangit23
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

get_asset

Get full asset information using its ID: returns URL, download link, license info, and metadata.

Instructions

Get full details for a specific asset by its ID (e.g. 'iconify:mdi:home' or 'pexels:12345'). Returns the asset URL, download URL, license info, and metadata.

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_asset"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesAsset ID (e.g. 'iconify:mdi:home', 'svgrepo:12345', 'unsplash:abc123')

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description takes on the burden. It discloses the return payload (URL, download URL, license, metadata) but doesn't mention error handling, rate limits, or authentication requirements, which is a moderate 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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the action and scoped by 'specific asset by its ID'. No filler, each 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?

For a simple get-by-ID with no output schema, the description adequately covers the return values and ID format. It may lack error conditions, but given the low complexity, it is nearly 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?

The schema already provides a full description of the 'id' parameter with examples. The description's examples overlap with the schema, adding little new semantic meaning, so the 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?

The description clearly states a specific verb 'Get' and resource 'asset by its ID', distinguishing it from sibling search tools. It also provides concrete ID format examples.

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 phrase 'by its ID' implies use when an ID is already known, contrasting with the search-oriented siblings. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives like search_icons, but the context is evident.

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