Skip to main content
Glama
PuroDelphi

MCP Firebird

by PuroDelphi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Get Tool Help

get-tool-help
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get detailed information about a specific MCP Firebird tool. Provide the tool name to access its documentation, parameters, and usage examples.

Instructions

Gets detailed information about a specific tool

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toolNameYesName of the tool to get help for

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
errorNoFailure information; present when success is false
resultNoThe legacy JSON payload; present for completed operations and partial batches
successYesFalse for tool failures, including partially failed batches

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv2.12.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$defs": {
+    "__schema0": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "number"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "boolean"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        },
+        {
+          "items": {
+            "$ref": "#/$defs/__schema0"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        {
+          "additionalProperties": {
+            "$ref": "#/$defs/__schema0"
+          },
+          "propertyNames": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": "object"
+        }
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "error": {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "description": "Failure information; present when success is false",
+      "properties": {
+        "details": {
+          "additionalProperties": {
+            "$ref": "#/$defs/__schema0"
+          },
+          "propertyNames": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        "message": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "type": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "message",
+        "type"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "result": {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "description": "The legacy JSON payload; present for completed operations and partial batches",
+      "properties": {
+        "category": {
+          "enum": [
+            "database",
+            "metadata"
+          ],
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "description": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "inputSchema": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "name": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "title": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "usage": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "name",
+        "title",
+        "description",
+        "category",
+        "inputSchema",
+        "usage"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "success": {
+      "description": "False for tool failures, including partially failed batches",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "success"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv2.9.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / toolName / description
      Previous value: -"Nombre de la herramienta sobre la que obtener ayuda"New value: +"Name of the tool to get help for"
  3. First observed

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description adds nothing beyond this — no note on what 'detailed information' contains, nor whether an unknown toolName errors. It neither contradicts nor enriches the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is efficient, though its brevity borders on under-specification rather than optimal conciseness.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the tool is a simple read-only lookup. Still, the definition omits any routing context relative to list-available-tools or the describe-* family, leaving a gap for a tool whose main value is discovery.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage and a single, self-explanatory toolName parameter, the schema carries the full burden. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 states a clear verb+resource: it retrieves detailed information about a specific tool. However, it does not distinguish itself from siblings like list-available-tools or the many describe-* tools, leaving the agent to infer whether 'tool' means an MCP tool or a database object.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus list-available-tools (which presumably lists tools) or why an agent would call it at all. No prerequisites, no exclusions, no alternative named.

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