Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@argosvix/mcp-server

@argosvix/mcp-server

by argosvix
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

get_safety_assessment

Retrieve detailed safety assessment by ID, including flagged categories, score, reasoning, classifier ID, and source.

Instructions

Fetch one assessment's detail by id. Use assessments[].id from list_safety_assessments as-is. Includes labels (array of flagged categories) + score (max category score 0-1) + reasoning + classifier_id + source. Same endpoint as the argosvix://safety-assessments/{id} resource template.

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": {
      "assessmentId": "<assessmentId>"
    },
    "name": "get_safety_assessment"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
assessmentIdYesTarget assessment id (AUTOINCREMENT integer)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.30.0-alpha.14

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations provided; description compensates by listing exact return fields (labels, score, reasoning, classifier_id, source) and noting the endpoint resource template, indicating a read-only GET operation with no side effects.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: purpose, usage hint, and return details. Front-loaded and free of redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a one-parameter tool with no output schema, description fully covers purpose, input sourcing, and output structure. No gaps remain.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema already describes assessmentId as 'AUTOINCREMENT integer'. Description adds value by specifying where to obtain the id (from list_safety_assessments), providing usage context beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states 'Fetch one assessment's detail by id', specifies verb and resource, and distinguishes from list counterpart by referencing list_safety_assessments. It also outlines return fields, providing complete purpose clarity.

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?

Provides explicit instruction to use assessments[].id from list_safety_assessments, leaving no ambiguity about input source. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but given the singular nature of the tool, guidance is sufficient.

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