Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MCP Kafka Schema Reg

MCP Kafka Schema Reg

by aywengo
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Register Schema Interactive

register_schema_interactive

Interactively registers Kafka schemas by eliciting missing field definitions when the schema is incomplete or lacks required fields.

Instructions

Interactive schema registration with elicitation for missing field definitions.

When schema_definition is incomplete or missing fields, this tool will elicit the required information from the user interactively.

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": {
      "subject": "<subject>"
    },
    "name": "register_schema_interactive"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contextNo
subjectYes
registryNo
schema_typeNoAVRO
schema_definitionNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv3.1.0
  2. Removedv2.2.2
  3. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations (idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description discloses a behavior an agent must know before calling: the tool will stop and prompt the user for missing information rather than failing or silently registering. It omits what happens if elicitation is declined or whether a partial schema can be registered, but the core interactive disclosure is genuinely useful.

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?

Two short sentences with the distinguishing behavior front-loaded in the title phrase and then explained. The second sentence restates 'interactive elicitation for missing field definitions' already implied by the first, a minor redundancy but no real waste.

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

Completeness2/5

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

This is a mutation tool with 5 undocumented parameters, no output schema, and only minimal annotations. The description explains the elicitation behavior but says nothing about required inputs (subject), what registration produces, or error behavior, leaving significant gaps for a write operation.

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 coverage is 0% and there are 5 parameters, yet the description only touches on schema_definition. subject (the sole required parameter), registry, context, and schema_type receive no meaning, format, or default explanation anywhere, so the description does not compensate for the coverage gap.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('schema registration') and adds a distinguishing trait: it is 'interactive' with 'elicitation for missing field definitions', which separates it from the plain register_schema sibling. It stops short of explicitly naming that sibling as the non-interactive alternative, so the differentiation is implied rather than stated.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It gives one conditional trigger: use this when schema_definition is incomplete or has missing fields. It does not say what to use when the definition is complete, nor does it name register_schema as the alternative, so the agent must infer the routing rule from the sibling 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