Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kura MCP Server

Kura MCP Server

by MMaiero
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

kura_get_framework_properties

Retrieve OSGi framework properties from a Kura instance to inspect runtime configuration and diagnose gateway issues.

Instructions

Get OSGi framework properties from a Kura instance

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": {
      "instance": "<instance>"
    },
    "name": "kura_get_framework_properties"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
instanceYesKura instance name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description is the sole source of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get', which implies read-only but does not explicitly state the absence of side effects, any required permissions, or what the response looks like.

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 one sentence, immediately front-loading the verb and object. It is appropriately concise with no wasted words.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple getter with a single enum parameter, the description covers the basic purpose. However, it lacks context about how these properties differ from those in sibling tools, and without an output schema or annotations, the description is relatively thin.

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 input schema fully documents the only parameter 'instance' with an enum of LOCAL and a description. The tool description adds no parameter-specific information, but the 100% schema coverage means the schema already handles this dimension.

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?

Description clearly states the action (get) and resource (OSGi framework properties) from a Kura instance. However, it does not distinguish this from sibling tools like kura_get_kura_properties or kura_get_extended_properties, which may overlap in scope.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description offers no context for selecting this over related getter tools, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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