mcp-server-rt

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

get_transaction

Read-only

Fetch the full transaction details with decoded message content to read the exact text of a reply or comment. Use it after ticket history to inspect individual responses.

Instructions

Get the full details of a single transaction including decoded message content. Use this after get_ticket_history to read the actual text of a reply or comment.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "get_transaction"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Transaction ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.1Aug 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already signals a safe read operation, and the description adds that it returns 'decoded message content,' which is a useful behavioral detail beyond the annotation. No contradiction exists. It doesn't discuss return format or errors, but for a simple get operation this is reasonable.

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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and every word earns its place. It avoids redundancy and is highly efficient.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description explains what is returned (full details plus decoded content) and provides clear usage context via the sibling reference. For a simple single-parameter tool with strong annotations, this is complete.

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 with a single parameter 'id' described as 'Transaction ID.' The description adds no new parameter-level detail beyond referencing 'single transaction,' which is already in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema carries the burden.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's function: 'Get the full details of a single transaction including decoded message content.' It uses a specific verb ('Get'), identifies the resource ('single transaction'), and distinguishes itself from siblings like get_ticket_history by noting the decoded content feature.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit usage guidance is provided: 'Use this after get_ticket_history to read the actual text of a reply or comment.' This directly tells the agent when to use this tool relative to a sibling, fulfilling the dimension fully.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.