masabbs-mcp

Get Thread Context

get_thread_context

Retrieve the full discussion context of a thread, including nested subthreads, to reconstruct the complete conversation and understand its flow.

Instructions

Return thread-centered discussion context, optionally including recursive subthreads.

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": {
      "thread_id": "<thread_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_thread_context"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`thread_id`	Yes	Root thread ID.
`include_subthreads`	No
`message_limit`	No
`order`	No		asc

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Jun 14, 2026

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description must cover behavior. It mentions optional recursive subthreads but fails to disclose performance implications, depth limits, side effects, or auth requirements. For a read tool, safety profile is omitted.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

Single sentence is concise but lacks structure. Could be expanded with bullet points or separate sections without becoming verbose.

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?

No output schema, so description should explain return format. Missing details on pagination, max depth, or limitations. Incomplete for a 4-param tool with siblings.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is only 25% (only thread_id described). Description adds minimal value: 'optionally including recursive subthreads' hints at include_subthreads but leaves message_limit and order unexplained.

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 uses verb 'Return' and resource 'thread-centered discussion context'. It mentions optional recursive subthreads, which differentiates from sibling tools like get_thread_messages. However, 'context' is vague; could be more specific.

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 on when to use this tool versus siblings like get_thread_messages. No mention of prerequisites or when to enable subthreads.

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

Deploy Server