Skip to main content
Glama

get_design_version

Read-only

Retrieve a specific design version by ID to inspect its source code, parameters, and notes when you know the version reference.

Instructions

Retrieve a single design version by its ID.

        Use this to inspect the full source code, parameters, and notes
        for a specific version when you already know the version reference.

        Args:
            version_id: ``design_id:N`` reference (e.g. ``my-coaster:3``)
                or a plain integer version number if the design_id is
                unambiguous.

        Returns:
            The version record including source_scad, prompt,
            parameters, notes, and parent_version.
            Returns an error if the version does not exist.
        

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": {
      "version_id": "<version_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_design_version"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
version_idYes``design_id:N`` reference (e.g. ``my-coaster:3``) or a plain integer version number if the design_id is unambiguous.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.5.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / version_id / description
      Added value: +"``design_id:N`` reference (e.g. ``my-coaster:3``) or a plain integer version number if the design_id is unambiguous."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish this is a non-destructive, non-open-world read. Beyond that, the description discloses what the record contains (source_scad, prompt, parameters, notes, parent_version) and states the failure mode ('Returns an error if the version does not exist'), which is genuinely additive context.

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?

The opening sentence is front-loaded and the Args/Returns structure is easy to scan. The Args block duplicates the schema rather than earning its place, which is the only real waste in an otherwise tight definition.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by enumerating the returned fields and the error condition. For a single-parameter, read-only lookup, an agent has everything needed to call it and interpret the result.

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% and the Args section reproduces the schema text for version_id nearly verbatim, adding no new meaning about format edge cases or precedence between the design_id:N form and the bare integer form. With the schema already complete, this lands at the baseline.

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: 'Retrieve a single design version by its ID', which clearly separates it from list_design_versions, diff_design_versions, and best_design_version. It stops short of naming those siblings explicitly, but the singular/by-ID framing makes the scope unambiguous.

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?

It gives a clear usage condition: 'when you already know the version reference', which implicitly routes discovery work to list/search tools. It does not name concrete alternatives (e.g. list_design_versions to find an ID, get_design_source for current source), so the routing is implied rather than spelled out.

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