Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Cortex Intelligent

Cortex Intelligent

by adyoi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

get_procedure

Retrieve a procedure by name to view its defined steps, rules, or workflow guidance.

Instructions

Get a procedure by name.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "get_procedure"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden, and it says only 'Get.' It implies a safe read but does not state permissions, whether a missing name errors or returns empty, or what is returned; a getter with zero annotation coverage needs more than this.

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 appropriately sized for a trivial getter, though the brevity reflects under-specification rather than tight information density.

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 one-parameter getter with no output schema, the definition is minimally workable, but it omits lookup/return semantics and missing-record behavior. No annotations or output schema exist to fill those gaps.

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 description coverage is 0% and the single `name` parameter has no description, so the description should compensate. 'By name' merely restates the parameter identifier already visible in the schema and adds no format, casing, or matching guidance.

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 and resource ('Get a procedure') and adds the retrieval key ('by name'), so the operation is unambiguous. It does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling `list_procedures` or `update_procedure_block`, so it stops short of a 5.

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 when-to-use guidance, no condition for choosing this over `list_procedures`, and no mention of prerequisites or error behavior when the name is unknown. 'By name' implies the lookup key but leaves usage entirely to inference.

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