Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Motozmo MCP Server

Motozmo MCP Server

by Rehana-A
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

get_guide

Fetch the full text of a Motozmo guide by slug or URL to retrieve repair instructions or gear reviews for quoting and reference.

Instructions

Fetch the full text of a motozmo.com guide by slug or URL.

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": {
      "slug_or_url": "<slug_or_url>"
    },
    "name": "get_guide"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slug_or_urlYesArticle slug (e.g. 'how-to-test-motorcycle-ground-connection') or full URL

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.5

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It makes clear this is a non-mutating full-text retrieval, but says nothing about output format (markdown vs HTML), truncation of long guides, or behavior on an invalid slug or non-motozmo URL.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that identifies the action, the resource, and the input form with zero filler. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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?

For a one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the definition covers what it returns (full text) and how to address the target. The only real gap is the shape/format of the returned guide content, which an agent might want before parsing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the schema already documents slug_or_url with an example and the "slug or full URL" acceptance. The description only restates that dual-form input, adding no format, normalization, or error-handling detail beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb ("Fetch") and resource ("full text of a motozmo.com guide"), plus the two accepted addressing forms (slug or URL). It implicitly distinguishes itself from siblings like search_guides/list_latest by returning the full article body rather than a listing, though it never names an alternative explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the follow-up call once a slug or URL is known from search_guides or list_latest. There is no explicit statement of when to use this instead of a search/listing tool, nor prerequisites like needing a valid slug first.

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