Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
nodebb-mcp

nodebb-mcp

by Heknon
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Get a topic's answer

get_topic_answer
Read-only

Retrieve the accepted answer to a NodeBB topic by ID, or the top-voted reply when no answer is confirmed, so you know what is verified.

Instructions

Get the answer to one specific topic. With the Q&A plugin this is the accepted answer, and an open question is reported as genuinely unanswered rather than guessed at. Without it, returns the most-upvoted reply, labelled as unconfirmed.

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": {
      "tid": "<tid>"
    },
    "name": "get_topic_answer"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tidYesTopic id.

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 declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description goes beyond that by disclosing two behavioral modes contingent on plugin presence (accepted answer vs. most-upvoted unconfirmed reply) and a no-guess policy for open questions – genuinely useful context an agent cannot get from annotations.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and then the plugin-dependent behavioral nuance. No filler.

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-param read tool, the description covers purpose and the main behavioral contingency (plugin presence) that influences the returned content. No output schema exists, but the description does explain the nature of the returned answer, which compensates; a note on error handling for missing topics would complete it.

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?

Single required 'tid' integer with 100% schema coverage including 'Topic id.' and exclusiveMinimum. The description adds no syntax, format, or boundary detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 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?

Clear verb+resource: retrieves the answer for a specific topic by id. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like get_post or find_answers, but the 'topic's answer' scope is specific enough to distinguish from a generic post fetch.

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?

Implied usage is 'fetch the answer for a known topic id', but the description gives no explicit when-to-use versus find_answers or get_topic, nor any preconditions. An agent can infer the context but is not guided to the alternative tools.

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