Skip to main content
Glama
Iqram09

kong-ai-gateway-mcp

by Iqram09
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Get one Kong route

get_route
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a single Kong route's paths, methods, hosts, protocols, and owning service by route name or reference. Not for URL paths.

Instructions

Retrieves a single Kong route and the service it is attached to.

USE WHEN: you already know the route name or have a route: reference from another tool, and need its paths, methods, hosts, protocols, or which service handles it.

DO NOT USE with a URL path such as "/payments" -- route names and route paths are different things, and this tool takes the name. Use find_route_by_path to go from a path to a route.

RETURNS: route with ref, paths, methods, hosts, protocols, stripPath, and serviceRef naming the owning service.

LIMITATIONS: does not return plugins. A route can look entirely correct here while being unauthenticated -- call list_plugins_for_route to see what actually applies to it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
routeYesRoute name, id, or a `route:<name>` reference. Example: "payments-prod" or "route:payments-prod". This is NOT a URL path -- for a path like /payments use find_route_by_path.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safe-read profile (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false), but the description adds genuinely new behavioral context: the tool does not return plugins and a route can appear correct while being unauthenticated, with a pointer to list_plugins_for_route. It stops short of describing response format or error behavior, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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?

Uses labeled sections (USE WHEN, DO NOT USE, RETURNS, LIMITATIONS) with the core purpose front-loaded in the first sentence. Every sentence carries actionable content with no filler.

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?

For a single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers identity, inputs, expected return fields, and a non-obvious limitation plus remediation. Nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and the schema already states the 'not a URL path' constraint, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces this semantically by clarifying that route names and route paths are distinct concepts and that this tool takes the name, which meaningfully helps the agent pass a valid value.

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 and resource ('Retrieves a single Kong route and the service it is attached to') and explicitly distinguishes itself from find_route_by_path by clarifying that names and paths are different. An agent can select this tool without opening the 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?

The USE WHEN section names the trigger condition (known route name or `route:` reference) and enumerates the fields needed, while DO NOT USE explicitly excludes URL paths and routes the agent to find_route_by_path. This is textbook when/when-not/alternative guidance.

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