Skip to main content
Glama
MikkoParkkola

MCP Gateway

by MikkoParkkola
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
Rust
Hybrid

Get Routing Profile

gateway_get_profile

Retrieve the active routing profile to view session permissions and restrictions for accessing aggregated MCP servers through a single gateway.

Instructions

Show the active routing profile for this session and what it allows or denies.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • benchmarks/token_savings.py:88-145 (schema)
    The MCP gateway tools are defined here. Note that 'gateway_get_profile' is NOT in this list, which contains the standard meta-MCP gateway tools ('gateway_list_servers', 'gateway_search_tools', 'gateway_invoke'). Based on the codebase analysis, it appears the tool 'gateway_get_profile' does not exist in the provided repository.
    GATEWAY_TOOLS = [
    {
        "name": "gateway_list_servers",
        "description": (
            "List all registered MCP backend servers with their names, "
            "descriptions, and tool counts. Use this first to discover "
            "available capabilities."
        ),
        "inputSchema": {
            "type": "object",
            "properties": {},
        },
    },
    {
        "name": "gateway_search_tools",
        "description": (
            "Search for tools across all registered backends by keyword. "
            "Returns matching tool names, descriptions, and which backend "
            "they belong to. Use this to find the right tool before invoking."
        ),
        "inputSchema": {
            "type": "object",
            "properties": {
                "query": {
                    "type": "string",
                    "description": "Search query to match against tool names and descriptions.",
                },
            },
            "required": ["query"],
        },
    },
    {
        "name": "gateway_invoke",
        "description": (
            "Invoke a specific tool on a specific backend server. "
            "Pass the server name, tool name, and arguments. "
            "The gateway routes the request and returns the result."
        ),
        "inputSchema": {
            "type": "object",
            "properties": {
                "server": {
                    "type": "string",
                    "description": "Name of the backend MCP server.",
                },
                "tool": {
                    "type": "string",
                    "description": "Name of the tool to invoke.",
                },
                "arguments": {
                    "type": "object",
                    "description": "Arguments to pass to the tool.",
                },
            },
            "required": ["server", "tool"],
        },
    },
]

Tool Definition Quality

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool 'shows' information, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't clarify if it requires authentication, has rate limits, or what happens if no profile is active. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency, as it lacks details on permissions, errors, or response format.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('show the active routing profile') and adds useful context ('for this session and what it allows or denies'). There is no wasted verbiage, and every word contributes to understanding the tool's function, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. It explains what the tool does but lacks details on behavioral aspects like error handling or return values. Without an output schema, the description should ideally hint at the response format, but it doesn't, leaving some gaps in completeness for a tool that interacts with session settings.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters, and the input schema has 100% description coverage (though empty). The description adds no parameter information, which is appropriate here. In such cases, the baseline score is 4, as there are no parameters to document, and the description doesn't need to compensate for any schema gaps.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: to 'show the active routing profile for this session and what it allows or denies.' It specifies the verb ('show') and resource ('active routing profile'), and distinguishes it from siblings like 'gateway_list_profiles' (which likely lists all profiles) and 'gateway_set_profile' (which modifies profiles). However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with these siblings, keeping it from a perfect score.

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?

The description implies usage context by mentioning 'for this session,' suggesting it's used to check current session settings. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'gateway_list_profiles' or 'gateway_set_profile,' nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. This leaves usage somewhat inferred rather than clearly defined.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/MikkoParkkola/mcp-gateway'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server