HALO (GEMMA-by-GOOGLE)

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

run_curl

Send HTTP requests with custom method, URL, headers, and data, and receive the full verbose response for debugging or testing.

Instructions

Issue an HTTP request and return the verbose response.

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": {
      "url": "<url>"
    },
    "name": "run_curl"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	Yes	Request URL.
`data`	No	Request body for POST/PUT/PATCH.
`method`	No	HTTP method.	GET
`headers`	No	Single header string.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 10, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden, but it only states it returns the verbose response. It does not mention timeout, error handling, redirects, authentication, or other important HTTP behaviors.

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 sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's purpose without any wasted words or structure.

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?

For a tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal but sufficient for a simple HTTP request tool. It covers the core functionality but lacks detail on edge cases or response format.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, but the schema already adequately defines each parameter.

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 it issues an HTTP request and returns the verbose response, which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like run_ffuf (fuzzing) or run_nmap (network scanning) by being a general HTTP client, but does not explicitly differentiate from run_wget.

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. It does not mention prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer from the name alone.

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