Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
hex-mcp-server

hex-mcp-server

by chuotdelongchamp
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

hex-get-collection

Fetch details for a single Hex collection by ID to inspect its attributes and support workspace auditing or management.

Instructions

Get details of a single collection by ID.

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": {
      "collectionId": "<collectionId>"
    },
    "name": "hex-get-collection"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
collectionIdYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Get' implies a read, but it says nothing about permissions, error behavior for unknown IDs, or what 'details' are returned; for a no-annotation tool this is a significant gap.

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?

A single efficient sentence with the resource and identifier front-loaded. It is appropriately sized for a one-parameter tool, though the brevity contributes to the gaps noted elsewhere.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple one-parameter read tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally viable. It does not describe the returned fields or any access requirements, leaving the agent to call it blind.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% and the description only adds 'by ID', which largely restates the parameter name collectionId. It does not clarify format, whether the ID is a UUID or slug, or any constraints.

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?

States a specific verb (get) and resource (a single collection) with the identifying key (ID). It is clearly distinguishable from hex-list-collections, which retrieves many, though it does not explicitly name that sibling.

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 single-vs-list distinction is implied by 'a single collection by ID', giving an agent enough to infer when to reach for this over hex-list-collections. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives.

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