nc-mcp-server

get_collective_page

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a collective page and its Markdown content using a collective ID and page ID. Use it to read page text when metadata alone is not enough.

Instructions

Get a single page from a collective, including its content.

Collectives serves page metadata and page text from two different places, so this reads the page's Markdown file after the metadata call.

Args: collective_id: The numeric collective ID. page_id: The numeric page ID. Use get_collective_pages to find IDs.

Returns: JSON object with page details and "content", the page's Markdown text. An empty page has an empty string. When the file cannot be read, "content" is null and "content_error" says why.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`page_id`	Yes
`collective_id`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.7.0Sep 21, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/no-destructive, yet the description adds non-obvious behavior: the two-source architecture, the empty-string vs null content distinction, and the content_error field on read failure. That is genuine failure-mode disclosure beyond structured data.

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 action, then supporting architecture note and Args/Returns sections. Every sentence carries information, though the structured sections add slight length for only two parameters.

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?

Despite an output schema existing, the description usefully characterizes content/content_error semantics, and it fully covers the two required params and the read-only nature. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate: it documents both params as numeric IDs and explains how to obtain page_id. It is only slightly under-specified on collective_id sourcing.

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 (get) and resource (a single collective page) plus scope ('including its content'), which distinguishes it from list-oriented siblings like get_collective_pages and search_collective_pages. The added note that it reads the Markdown file after metadata makes the operation precise.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent to get_collective_pages to find page_id, which is real when-to-use guidance tied to a sibling. It does not state exclusions (e.g., when to prefer search_collective_pages), so it falls short of a full when-not treatment.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server