Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
VeritasGraph

VeritasGraph

by bibinprathap
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

veritasgraph_get_term

Retrieve a glossary term by ID or name to view its definition, synonyms, status, and linked entities.

Instructions

One glossary term (by id or name) with its definition, synonyms, status and linked entities.

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": {
      "term": "<term>"
    },
    "name": "veritasgraph_get_term"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
termYesTerm id or name.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.2.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the shape of the result (definition, synonyms, status, linked entities) and 'get' implies a read-only lookup, but it says nothing about not-found behavior, what 'linked entities' means in practice, or any permission requirements.

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 single compact phrase with the resource front-loaded and the returned fields listed immediately after. Nothing is redundant or padded.

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 one-parameter lookup with no output schema and low complexity, the description gives enough to call it correctly and to anticipate the returned fields. Only edge-case behavior (missing term, expansion of linked entities) is absent, a minor gap at this complexity level.

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 coverage is 100% and the single parameter already documents 'Term id or name.' The description's 'by id or name' repeats that without adding format, precedence, or fallback behavior, so baseline 3 applies.

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 resource (one glossary term) plus the fields returned (definition, synonyms, status, linked entities), and 'one' signals a single-record lookup rather than a search. It does not name a differentiating sibling such as veritasgraph_search_terms or veritasgraph_structured_get_term, leaving some ambiguity between near-identical get tools.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no statement of when not to use it, and no pointer to alternatives for discovering a term you cannot identify exactly. The only implied usage is 'look up a known term by id or name', which the agent must infer.

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