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

hex-mcp-server

by chuotdelongchamp
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

hex-get-group

Fetch details of a single group by ID, including its members, for auditing or managing Hex workspace groups.

Instructions

Get details of a single group by ID, including members.

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": {
      "groupId": "<groupId>"
    },
    "name": "hex-get-group"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
groupIdYesThe group UUID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose return substance ('including members') and the read-only nature implied by 'Get', but says nothing about access requirements (e.g., group membership), error behavior for unknown IDs, or whether the response is paginated.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no padding; the resource, scope, and notable payload ('members') all appear immediately.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a one-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essentials: what to pass in and roughly what comes back. It would be a 5 with a note on access prerequisites or how members are represented.

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 coverage is 100% for the single groupId parameter, which the schema documents as 'The group UUID'. The description's 'by ID' matches but adds no format, case, or lookup detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource ('Get details of a single group') and scopes it to one item by ID, which distinguishes it in kind from hex-list-groups. It does not name the sibling explicitly, but the singular scope makes the distinction clear.

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?

Usage is only implied: 'single group by ID' signals this is the lookup tool rather than the enumerating one. There is no explicit when-to-use, no when-not-to-use, and no pointer to hex-list-groups for discovery.

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