Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
agent-nexus

agent-nexus

by dugubuyan
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_project_id_by_name

Retrieve the project ID of a sub-project using its human-readable name and project space ID. Solves the problem of locating a sub-project's unique identifier by its common name.

Instructions

Look up a sub-project's project_id by its human-readable name.

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": {
      "name": "<name>",
      "project_space_id": "<project_space_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_project_id_by_name"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
project_space_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, required permissions, or error states.

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 a single sentence with no wasted words, front-loaded with the main action.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The tool is simple and the description conveys the core purpose, but it lacks explicit mention of the return format, edge cases, or the role of project_space_id.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0% with no descriptions. The description only explains the 'name' parameter (by human-readable name) but ignores 'project_space_id', leaving its role unclear.

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 verb 'look up', the resource 'sub-project's project_id', and the method 'by its human-readable name'. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like list_projects and register_project.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor are there any exclusions or prerequisites mentioned.

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