Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AIMFP

AIMFP

by aryanduntley
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_flows_from_directive

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve all flows originating from a specified directive. Returns raw flow data where AI evaluates conditions to determine next steps.

Instructions

Get all flows originating from a directive (what comes next?). Returns raw flow data - AI evaluates conditions.

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": {
      "from_directive": "<from_directive>"
    },
    "name": "get_flows_from_directive"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
from_directiveYesSource directive name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.37.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so basic safety is clear. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations: 'Returns raw flow data - AI evaluates conditions' indicates that the output is intermediate raw data requiring further AI processing, which informs agent behavior.

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?

The description is concise with two sentences front-loading the purpose. It avoids unnecessary detail but could be slightly more structured (e.g., listing return type). Still, it is efficient and clear.

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?

Given the simplicity (one param, no output schema), the description provides the core idea but lacks specifics on the return value structure (what fields are in 'raw flow data'). Additional detail on output format would improve completeness for agent processing.

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?

The schema has 100% coverage for the single parameter 'from_directive' with a clear description. The tool description does not add further meaning or nuance, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get all flows originating from a directive' and adds the clarifying parenthetical '(what comes next?)' which gives semantic context. However, it does not differentiate from similar siblings like 'get_directive_flows' or 'get_flows_to_directive', which could cause confusion.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention when-not to use it or provide comparisons to similar flow retrieval tools, leaving the agent to infer usage context 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.

Deploy Server

Other Tools