Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Aureon MCP

Aureon MCP

Official
by buildaureon
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

aureon_get_report

Retrieve a stored financial report by its report ID from Aureon MCP, so agents and hosts can inspect saved financial data on demand.

Instructions

One stored financial report

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": "aureon_get_report"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesReport id

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.16

TDQS

C2.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and delivers almost nothing: no indication of auth requirements, error behavior for a missing/invalid id, or what "stored" distinguishes (e.g. confirmed vs. prepared reports). The word "stored" is the only behavioral hint, and it is undefined.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

It is short, but brevity here comes from omission rather than precision — a four-word fragment with no verb. There is no front-loaded statement of action, so it reads as under-specification rather than conciseness.

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?

For a single-parameter, no-output-schema tool in a 60+ tool registry, the description should at minimum say it fetches one report by id and point to the list alternative. Neither is present, leaving the agent to guess at return shape and routing.

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 description coverage is 100% for the single `id` parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no format, type, or lookup semantics beyond what the schema already documents.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description is a bare noun phrase, "One stored financial report," that restates the resource in the tool name without a verb or scope statement. It does weakly imply singular retrieval versus the sibling aureon_list_reports, but an agent gets no confirmation of what the tool actually does.

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 when-to-use guidance is given, and neither the natural alternative (aureon_list_reports) nor related lifecycle tools (aureon_prepare_report, aureon_confirm_report) are mentioned. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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