Skip to main content
Glama
Iqram09

kong-ai-gateway-mcp

by Iqram09
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Find the route serving a URL path

find_route_by_path
Read-onlyIdempotent

Resolves a requested URL path to the Kong route or routes that serve it, so you can diagnose path-specific faults like auth failures or 429s.

Instructions

Resolves a URL path to the Kong route (or routes) that serve it.

USE WHEN: the user describes a problem in terms of a path -- "auth is failing on /payments", "/orders returns 429". This is almost always the correct FIRST tool for such a question, because everything else needs a route identifier.

RETURNS: matches, each a route summary with a ref to pass to get_route, list_plugins_for_route or diagnose_route. When nothing matches, returns matches: [] plus suggestions listing configured paths that closely resemble the one requested -- a near-miss there usually means a typo in the route definition.

LIMITATIONS: matches whole path values only, not Kong prefix-matching semantics, so a request to /payments/v2 handled by a /payments route will not match here. More than one match means the path is genuinely ambiguous in Kong and is worth investigating in itself.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYesThe URL path a client requests, exactly as the user described it. Example: "/payments". A leading slash is added if you omit it.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description goes well beyond them: it discloses the whole-path-not-prefix matching limitation, the near-miss `suggestions` behavior on empty matches, and the meaning of multiple matches. That is genuinely useful behavior the agent could not infer from the 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?

Front-loaded one-line purpose followed by labeled USE WHEN, RETURNS and LIMITATIONS blocks. Every sentence carries routing or behavioral information; nothing is padding.

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

Completeness5/5

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

With no output schema, the description compensates by describing the return shape (`matches` with `ref`, empty-array plus `suggestions` case) and the downstream tools the `ref` feeds into. An agent has everything needed to call it and chain 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?

The single `path` parameter is already 100% documented in the schema, including the leading-slash normalization and an example. The description reinforces but adds no new syntax or format meaning beyond the schema, 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?

States a specific verb (resolves) and resource (a URL path to the Kong route(s) serving it), and the title/description pair makes clear it is a path-to-route lookup rather than a route fetch. An agent can distinguish it from get_route, list_routes_for_service and diagnose_route without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit 'USE WHEN' section with concrete example phrasing ('auth is failing on /payments', '/orders returns 429') and an explicit routing rule: this is almost always the correct FIRST tool because everything else needs a route identifier. That is when-to-use plus the reasoning that picks it over siblings.

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