Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
addy-mcp

addy-mcp

by Former-Stranger
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

get_label

Read-only

Retrieves a single addy.io label by UUID, letting you inspect label details for organizing aliases and related account items.

Instructions

Get a single label.

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": {
      "label_id": "<label_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_label"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
label_idYesThe id (UUID) of the item

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.2

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered externally, but the description adds nothing on top — no note on what happens for a missing label, no visibility/permission context despite openWorldHint suggesting account-scoped data. It merely restates the operation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

One short, front-loaded sentence with zero waste, which is good structurally. However, the brevity crosses into under-specification: 'label' is never grounded and nothing beyond the operation name is conveyed.

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

Completeness3/5

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

This is a simple single-resource read with one required param and no output schema, so the bar is low, but the absence of an output schema means the description could usefully say what a label object contains and it does not. Adequate but with a clear gap.

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?

With a single parameter at 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents label_id as a UUID. The description contributes no additional meaning such as format, sourcing, or behavior on an invalid id, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb and resource — 'Get a single label' — which is unambiguous and clearly distinct from the create_label/update_label/delete_label siblings by the verb alone. It stops short of any explicit sibling routing, so it lands at clear-but-undifferentiated.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus other retrieval tools, no mention of prerequisites (e.g., needing a known label_id), and no statement about alternatives. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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