bardo_contact_get
Retrieve the registered contact endpoint used for out-of-band security alerts.
Instructions
View the contact endpoint registered for out-of-band security alerts.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| session_token | No |
Retrieve the registered contact endpoint used for out-of-band security alerts.
View the contact endpoint registered for out-of-band security alerts.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| session_token | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is clear. The description adds specific context: the endpoint is for 'out-of-band security alerts', which is useful beyond annotations. It does not contradict annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence that conveys the core purpose without any waste. It is frontloaded and efficient.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
While the tool is simple (1 param, no output schema, read-only), the description omits any explanation of the session_token parameter. This leaves a significant gap for an agent to correctly invoke the tool, especially given high sibling count.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the single parameter 'session_token' at all. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, leaving the parameter completely undocumented.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states it 'view[s] the contact endpoint registered for out-of-band security alerts', specifying the verb 'view' and the resource 'contact endpoint'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like bardo_contact_set (set) and bardo_contact_delete (delete).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies usage for viewing a contact endpoint but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any conditions or prerequisites. The context is implied but not elaborated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/calebe/bardo'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server