Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
HitKeep

HitKeep

by HitKeep
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Go
Hybrid

Get HitKeep Doc

hitkeep_get_doc
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch official HitKeep documentation pages as Markdown to access setup guides, API references, and reporting details. Resolve integration or configuration issues by finding the exact docs you need.

Instructions

Fetch an official HitKeep docs page as markdown.

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": {
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "hitkeep_get_doc"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYesOfficial HitKeep docs path or URL.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYes
pathYes
markdownYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.8.1

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already disclose readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the 'official' constraint and the 'as markdown' output format, which are useful behavioral details, but does not explain error handling or content structure. No contradictions with 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?

The description is a single, concise sentence that directly states the action and output format with no filler. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 one-parameter, read-only tool with full schema coverage and an output schema, the description is largely complete. It covers the core purpose and output format, though it lacks any elaboration on edge cases or when to prefer it over sibling tools.

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% for the single 'path' parameter, so the schema fully documents its meaning. The description adds no extra semantic information beyond naming the resource, so it stays at the baseline score of 3.

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 uses the specific verb 'Fetch' with a clear resource ('official HitKeep docs page') and output format ('as markdown'), making it easy to understand. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like hitkeep_search_docs, which is for searching rather than direct retrieval.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention the existence of hitkeep_search_docs or any criteria for choosing this tool over other docs-related tools, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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