Skip to main content
Glama
amanharshx

ultralytics-mcp

by amanharshx
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

models_get

Read-only

Fetch details for a single model by owner/project/model, ul:// URI, or slug plus project. Quality metrics like best epoch and fitness are excluded; use model_metrics instead.

Instructions

Get details for one model by owner/project/model, ul://owner/project/model, or slug with a project. Model quality (best epoch and fitness) is not included; use model_metrics, which validates the platform's best-epoch fields.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modelYesModel ref by owner/project/model, ul:// URI, or slug (requires project).
projectNoProject ref required when model is given by slug.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.15
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.12
    • changedInput schema / properties / model / description
      Previous value: -"Model id, or slug when project is also provided."New value: +"Model ref by owner/project/model, ul:// URI, or slug (requires project)."
  3. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.1.6
    • addedInput schema / properties / model / description
      Added value: +"Model id, or slug when project is also provided."
    • addedInput schema / properties / project / description
      Added value: +"Project ref required when model is given by slug."
  4. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: it discloses a scope limitation (best epoch/fitness excluded) and names the tool that does provide it, which prevents a misled empty-result interpretation. No auth, pagination, or return-shape detail, keeping it at 4.

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 tight two-clause sentence: the core action and accepted ref formats come first, the exclusion and pointer to model_metrics last. No filler or redundancy.

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 two-param read tool with no output schema, the description covers the key pitfall (missing quality fields) and directs to the right alternative. It could be more complete with a note on what is returned, but annotations and the schema carry the safety and parameter burden adequately.

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 both parameters (model, project) are already documented with the same ref-format and slug-requires-project rules. The description largely restates this, adding no syntax or format detail the schema lacks. Baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource ('Get details for one model') and enumerates the accepted reference forms (owner/project/model, ul:// URI, or slug with project). It also carves out its boundary against the sibling model_metrics, so an agent can select it without opening a schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly tells the agent this tool does NOT return quality data and routes that need to model_metrics, which is genuine when/when-not guidance. It stops short of stating prerequisites or alternatives for other model-listing/detail cases (e.g. models_list).

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