Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-archimate

mcp-archimate

by byrondelgado
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

list_orphan_elements

Read-only

Identify ArchiMate model elements that lack relationships or view placement, revealing gaps for correction.

Instructions

List elements with no relationships and/or no view placement.

Useful for finding gaps before completing a model.

Returns:
    Success envelope with `data.elements_without_relationships`,
    `data.elements_not_in_any_view`, and `data.fully_orphan_elements`
    (each a list of element IDs), plus matching count fields.

Errors:
    `ModelNotFoundError` if no model is active.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_orphan_elements"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so safety is clear. The description adds value by detailing the return structure (three arrays and count fields) and the ModelNotFoundError, which are beyond the annotations.

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 concise with three sentences: purpose, usage hint, and returns/errors. Front-loaded with the main action, no wasted words.

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?

With zero parameters and an output schema present, the description sufficiently explains the return fields and error possibilities. It is complete for a simple list tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

There are zero parameters, so baseline 4 applies per rules (no parameters to describe). The description does not need to add parameter info as the schema is empty and fully covered.

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 specifies 'List elements with no relationships and/or no view placement,' clearly stating the verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like query_elements by focusing on orphan detection.

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?

The description says 'Useful for finding gaps before completing a model,' which implies usage context but does not explicitly compare to sibling tools or state when not to use. No exclusions or alternatives are provided.

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