Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ignition-mcp-server

ignition-mcp-server

by KonnectSuite
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

get_history

Query historical tag data from a live Ignition gateway for a tag path and ISO 8601 start/end times.

Instructions

Query historical tag data from a live Ignition gateway.

Requires the server to be started with --gateway-url and a historian configured on the gateway.

Args: tag_path: Full tag path (e.g. "[default]Conveyors/Line1/Speed"). start: Start time as ISO 8601 (e.g. "2026-04-12T00:00:00Z"). end: End time as ISO 8601 (e.g. "2026-04-12T12:00:00Z").

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": {
      "tag_path": "<tag_path>",
      "start": "<start>",
      "end": "<end>"
    },
    "name": "get_history"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
endYes
startYes
tag_pathYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.5.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided; description notes necessary setup but does not disclose side effects, rate limits, authentication, or typical error conditions. Limited behavioral context.

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 efficient paragraphs: first sentence states purpose, second covers prerequisites, then clear parameter list with examples. No superfluous content.

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?

Covers prerequisites and parameter formats well. Output schema exists (not shown), so return value details are delegated. Could briefly note that it returns historical data points, but sufficient.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema has 0% description coverage; description adds full details for all three parameters: examples for tag_path, ISO 8601 format for start and end. Maximally compensates for schema gap.

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?

Clear verb 'Query' and resource 'historical tag data' directly indicate the tool's function. Distinguishes from siblings like read_tag (current value) and get_tags (tag metadata).

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?

States prerequisites (server started with --gateway-url, historian configured) but does not specify when not to use or contrast with alternative tools like read_tag.

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