Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

compass-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Bulk-fetch Compass listings by url or listing_id_sha

compass_bulk_get
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch up to 200 Compass listings in a single call. Returns one structured row per input target (no side-by-side summary table — use compass_compare_properties for that).

Instructions

Fetch up to 200 Compass listings in a single call. Returns one structured row per input target (no side-by-side summary table — use compass_compare_properties for that). Each row is either { listing_id_sha, url, status: "ok", property } on success or { listing_id_sha, url, status, error_kind, retryable, error } on failure (status = error_kind) — one bad target never fails the whole call. retryable: true (a bridge timeout after one retry, an unreachable bridge_down, issue #73) is NOT a missing listing, so retry it (a cold bridge usually succeeds on the second call) rather than concluding Compass has no record; protocol / other are real misses. Targets accept the same url / listing_id_sha shape as compass_get_property. Calls fan out concurrently. The whole call is bounded by an overall deadline: a slow or hung row never wedges it — any row still unsettled when the deadline is reached comes back as { status: "pending", retryable: true, error } alongside a top-level pending count, so re-run just those targets. The envelope also reports count / ok / errored. extracted_features is populated per row. The raw description is omitted by default — pass include_description: true to keep it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
viewNoResponse shape: "compact" (default) drops fields the response already carries elsewhere; "full" returns every field this server understands. compact strips image/avatar URLs from the response; "full" returns Compass's payload untouched. No field projection: this server has no verified record of which Compass fields matter, and inventing one would risk dropping a field a caller needs.
targetsYesUp to 200 targets to fetch. For higher counts, batch into multiple calls.
include_descriptionNoInclude the raw `description` on each row. Defaults to `false` — `extracted_features` is always populated.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.1.10
    • addedInput schema / properties / view
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Response shape: \"compact\" (default) drops fields the response already carries elsewhere; \"full\" returns every field this server understands. compact strips image/avatar URLs from the response; \"full\" returns Compass's payload untouched. No field projection: this server has no verified record of which Compass fields matter, and inventing one would risk dropping a field a caller needs.",
+  "enum": [
+    "compact",
+    "full"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  3. First observedv0.12.1

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld; the description adds substantial behavior beyond them: per-row failure isolation ('one bad target never fails the whole call'), the `retryable` vs `protocol`/`other` distinction with issue #73 context, the overall deadline and `pending` fallback, envelope counts, and concurrent fan-out. This is exactly the operational context annotations cannot carry.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded with the core capability, then output shape, then failure/retry semantics, then deadline behavior. Dense but nearly every sentence carries distinct information; the parenthetical restatement of `status` = `error_kind` and the repeated explanation of `extracted_features` are mild redundancy.

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 no output schema, the description fully carries the return contract: both success and error row shapes, `pending` rows, top-level `count`/`ok`/`errored`/`pending`, and the default omission of raw `description`. There is nothing material an agent needs for correct invocation and result handling that is missing.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description restates `include_description` default false and the `url`/`listing_id_sha` target shape, and mentions `extracted_features` being always populated, but adds no syntax or format detail the schema does not already carry. The `view` parameter is left entirely to the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource with scope ('Fetch up to 200 Compass listings in a single call') and separates itself from siblings by explicitly naming `compass_compare_properties` as the tool for side-by-side comparison. Also positions itself relative to `compass_get_property` by noting identical target shape. An agent can place it without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Clear routing guidance: use `compass_compare_properties` for a summary table, batch into multiple calls above 200 targets, and re-run only `pending` rows after a deadline. It also gives actionable retry policy for `retryable: true` cases. What it lacks is an explicit statement of when a single target should go to `compass_get_property` instead of this bulk call.

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