Skip to main content
Glama

get_template_source

Retrieves the full Tailwind CSS HTML source of a template by ID so an AI agent can customize its data and render it as a PDF.

Instructions

Retrieves the full Tailwind CSS HTML source code of a document template by ID, allowing an AI agent to customize data and render it with render_pdf.

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": {
      "template_id": "<template_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_template_source"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
template_idYesTemplate identifier

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.4.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the return content precisely ('full Tailwind CSS HTML source code'), which tells the agent the output is raw editable markup rather than a rendered artifact. It omits whether access is read-only, what happens with an invalid ID, and whether the source reflects customizations already saved.

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 front-loaded sentence that states the resource first and the purpose second, with no filler. 'allowing an AI agent to' is slightly verbose but ties the tool to the workflow. Effectively sized for a one-parameter read tool.

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?

Since there is no output schema, the description correctly explains what comes back (full HTML source). With no annotations and one fully documented parameter, little is missing. The main gap is not pointing to list_templates or clarifying how the retrieved source relates to render_template.

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% and the single parameter is an enum listing every valid template identifier, so the schema fully documents the parameter. The description adds only 'by ID,' which duplicates the schema. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the work.

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 names a specific verb and resource: 'Retrieves the full Tailwind CSS HTML source code of a document template by ID.' It also names the downstream consumer (render_pdf), which clarifies the intent. It stops short of distinguishing this from render_template, the most similar sibling, so an agent must infer that difference.

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 implied rather than stated: an agent should call this when it needs to 'customize data and render it with render_pdf,' which sketches a workflow. There is no explicit when-not guidance, no mention of list_templates for discovering template IDs, and no signal about when render_template alone would suffice.

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