Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
codemenu-mcp

codemenu-mcp

by Extiri
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

get_snippet

Retrieve the complete code content and full details of a specific snippet using its unique ID to review or reuse existing code.

Instructions

Get full details of a specific snippet by ID, including the complete code content

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_snippet"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe unique identifier of the snippet (UUID format)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.0.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that the response includes the complete code content (a real behavioral detail distinguishing it from a listing call), but says nothing about permissions, not-found behavior, or whether the content is truncated for large snippets.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the action and lookup key, with the payload characteristic appended. No filler and nothing wasted.

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 single-parameter read tool with no output schema and full parameter documentation, the description covers what it fetches and roughly what comes back. It stops short of describing the response shape or error cases, but nothing essential to correct invocation is missing.

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 description coverage is 100% and the single id parameter already specifies UUID format. The description only restates that lookup is by ID, adding no format or constraint detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb (Get) and resource (a specific snippet) plus the retrieval key (by ID) and the depth of data returned (full details, complete code content). This implicitly separates it from list_snippets, which returns collections, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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: fetch this when you already have a snippet ID. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no mention of what to do when you only have a name or tag, and no routing to list_snippets for discovery.

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