Skip to main content
Glama
daanno

Simplicate MCP Server

by daanno

get_services

Retrieve services catalog from Simplicate business data to access service offerings and project-related services for business operations.

Instructions

Retrieve services catalog

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
offsetNo

Implementation Reference

  • Registration of the 'get_services' tool including name, description, and input schema in the tools array passed to server.setTools()
    {
      name: 'get_services',
      description: 'Retrieve services catalog',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          limit: { type: 'number' },
          offset: { type: 'number' },
        },
      },
    },
  • Input schema for the get_services tool: optional limit and offset parameters
    inputSchema: {
      type: 'object',
      properties: {
        limit: { type: 'number' },
        offset: { type: 'number' },
      },
    },
  • Handler for get_services tool call: extracts params, calls simplicateService.getServices(), returns JSON stringified response
    case 'get_services': {
      const data = await this.simplicateService.getServices({
        limit: (toolArgs.limit as number) || 10,
        offset: (toolArgs.offset as number) || 0,
      });
      return { content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(data, null, 2) }] };
  • Core implementation of getServices: HTTP GET to Simplicate API /services/service endpoint with optional pagination params
    async getServices(params?: { limit?: number; offset?: number }): Promise<SimplicateService[]> {
      const response = await this.client.get('/services/service', params);
      return response.data || [];
    }
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 burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Retrieve' implies a read operation, but it doesn't specify if this is safe (non-destructive), requires authentication, has rate limits, or what the output format might be. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves critical behavioral traits unexplained.

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?

The description is extremely concise at two words, with zero wasted text. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly. This efficiency is appropriate given the tool's apparent simplicity, though it may sacrifice detail.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the complexity (a retrieval tool with 2 parameters), no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'services catalog' entails, how results are returned, or handle the undocumented parameters. For a tool in a rich sibling set, this minimal description leaves too many gaps for effective use.

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?

The input schema has 2 parameters (limit, offset) with 0% description coverage, meaning their purpose is undocumented. The description 'Retrieve services catalog' adds no information about these parameters—it doesn't mention pagination, filtering, or sorting. With low schema coverage, the description fails to compensate, leaving parameters semantically unclear.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Retrieve services catalog' states the verb 'retrieve' and resource 'services catalog', which gives a basic understanding of what the tool does. However, it doesn't distinguish this from sibling tools like 'get_service' (singular) or 'get_default_services', leaving the scope ambiguous. The purpose is clear but lacks specificity about what distinguishes this retrieval operation from similar ones.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'get_service' (singular), 'get_default_services', and 'get_project_services', there's no indication of context, prerequisites, or exclusions. This forces the agent to guess based on tool names alone, which is inadequate for reliable selection.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/daanno/simplicate-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server