get_groups_reports_by_itemRetrieve a single group report by its unique item ID to access detailed household or group activity data. Use this endpoint to fetch specific report records when you need targeted information from Mealie.
Get One
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| item_id | Yes | ||
| accept-language | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v3.20.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Get One' only implies a read operation; it does not disclose whether this is read-only, what scoping or permissions apply, what the response contains, or any side effects. This is far below the minimum needed.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is short, but this is under-specification, not effective conciseness. 'Get One' is a fragment that conveys no useful information and cannot be considered appropriately sized for a tool with two parameters and a meaningful resource.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Despite having an output schema, the description is wholly inadequate for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly. It omits the resource, the meaning of item_id, the role of accept-language, and any relationship to sibling tools. Missing a single piece of information is acceptable, but missing everything is not.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate by explaining parameter meaning. 'Get One' explains nothing about item_id, its UUID format, or the optional accept-language parameter. The agent has to guess what item_id identifies in the groups/reports context.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description 'Get One' is a tautology of the tool name and title. It states the 'get' operation and singularity but never names the resource (groups reports), the lookup key (item_id), or what it returns. It does not distinguish this from the many sibling get_*_by_item tools.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not tell the agent to use this when a specific group report item is needed, or list_groups_reports when all reports are needed. The description offers no usage context whatsoever.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.