Skip to main content
Glama

relations

Resolve entities from YAML frontmatter to find their outbound and inbound relations, including replaces, depends_on, fixes, and implements edges.

Instructions

Return structured relations for an entity, derived from YAML frontmatter. Read-only.

    Entities and edges are declared **explicitly** in markdown frontmatter:

        ---
        id: adr-0042
        type: architecture
        replaces: [adr-0017]
        depends_on: [service-summarizer]
        status: active
        ---

    Recognised relation keys: replaces, depends_on, fixes, implements.
    Use timeline() to see when the doc holding an entity changed over time.

    Args:
        entity_id: Frontmatter ``id`` value of the entity to resolve
        project: Target project name (optional)

    Returns:
        Markdown showing the entity, its outbound edges (declared on
        this doc), and inbound edges (other docs that reference it).
        Lists are truncated; entities not found return a hint.
    

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectNo
entity_idYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: read-only, lists recognized relation keys, explains output format (Markdown with truncation and not-found hints), and describes how relations are declared in frontmatter. This exceeds expectations.

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 description is well-structured with a summary first, then a YAML example, recognized keys, args, and returns. It's longer but each part adds value. Minor conciseness issues: the example could be shorter, but overall front-loading is effective.

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?

Given the tool's complexity and that an output schema exists, the description is complete: it explains behavior, truncation, not-found hints, recognized keys, and references an alternative tool. No gaps in context.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description explains entity_id as the frontmatter 'id' value and project as an optional target project name, adding meaning beyond schema types and defaults. It could be more explicit about project's role, but it's good.

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?

The description clearly states the tool returns structured relations for an entity from YAML frontmatter, uses specific verbs like 'Return structured relations', and distinguishes from siblings like timeline() by mentioning it as an alternative for change history. It lists recognized relation keys, making the purpose 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?

The description provides clear context on when to use (to resolve an entity's relations) and explicitly suggests timeline() for change history. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide alternatives for tasks like listing all entities or searching, but the context is sufficient for most agents.

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/dl4rce/flaiwheel'

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