Skip to main content
Glama
OrionPotter

Meilisearch MCP Server

by OrionPotter

get-displayed-attributes

Retrieve the displayed attributes configuration for a Meilisearch index to understand which fields are visible in search results.

Instructions

Get the displayed attributes setting

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
indexUidYesUnique identifier of the index

Implementation Reference

  • Handler function that implements the core logic of the 'get-displayed-attributes' tool. It fetches the setting from Meilisearch API endpoint `/indexes/${indexUid}/settings/displayed-attributes` (endpoint resolved from config) and returns formatted JSON response or error.
    async ({ indexUid }) => {
      try {
        const response = await apiClient.get(`/indexes/${indexUid}/settings/${endpoint}`);
        return {
          content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(response.data, null, 2) }],
        };
      } catch (error) {
        return createErrorResponse(error);
      }
    }
  • Input schema validation using Zod for the tool's parameter: indexUid (string).
    {
      indexUid: z.string().describe("Unique identifier of the index"),
    },
  • Configuration object used in the dynamic registration loop to define the tool name, API endpoint, and description for 'get-displayed-attributes'.
    {
      name: "get-displayed-attributes",
      endpoint: "displayed-attributes",
      description: "Get the displayed attributes setting",
    },
  • Dynamic registration code that creates and registers the 'get-displayed-attributes' tool (and other get-* tools) with the MCP server using server.tool().
    // Create a tool for each specific setting
    specificSettingsTools.forEach(({ name, endpoint, description }) => {
      server.tool(
        name,
        description,
        {
          indexUid: z.string().describe("Unique identifier of the index"),
        },
        async ({ indexUid }) => {
          try {
            const response = await apiClient.get(`/indexes/${indexUid}/settings/${endpoint}`);
            return {
              content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(response.data, null, 2) }],
            };
          } catch (error) {
            return createErrorResponse(error);
          }
        }
      );
    });
  • src/index.ts:67-67 (registration)
    Top-level call to register all settings tools, including 'get-displayed-attributes', with the main MCP server instance.
    registerSettingsTools(server);

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states what the tool does at a high level ('get'), but doesn't describe what 'displayed attributes' are, whether this is a read-only operation, what permissions are needed, what the return format looks like, or any error conditions. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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 with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple getter tool and front-loads the core purpose immediately. Every word earns its place.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'displayed attributes' are in this system, what the return value contains, or how this differs from related settings tools. For a tool that presumably returns configuration data, more context about the returned data structure and purpose would be helpful.

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 has 100% description coverage, with the single parameter 'indexUid' clearly documented as 'Unique identifier of the index'. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what's in the schema, which is acceptable given the high schema coverage. The baseline score of 3 reflects adequate but minimal value addition.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Get the displayed attributes setting' clearly states the action (get) and the resource (displayed attributes setting), but it's vague about what 'displayed attributes' actually means in this context. It doesn't distinguish this tool from similar sibling tools like 'get-searchable-attributes' or 'get-filterable-attributes' beyond the specific setting name.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There's no mention of prerequisites, related operations (like 'update-displayed-attributes' or 'reset-displayed-attributes'), or typical use cases. The agent must infer usage from the tool name alone.

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