Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Grokipedia MCP Server

Grokipedia MCP Server

by fastmcp-me
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

get_page_section

Read-onlyIdempotent

Extract a specific section from an article by matching the header text. Provide page slug and header to get the content, with an optional max length.

Instructions

Extract a specific section from an article by header 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": {
      "slug": "<slug>",
      "section_header": "<section_header>"
    },
    "name": "get_page_section"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugYesUnique slug identifier of page to extract section from
section_headerYesExact header text of the section to extract (case-insensitive)
max_lengthNoMaximum length of section content to return (default: 5000)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.2

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent behavior. The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond what is in the schema (e.g., case-insensitivity is noted in schema parameter description, not the main description). Thus, it adds minimal value beyond annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It is efficient and to the point.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (3 parameters, no output schema), the description is adequate but minimal. It does not mention output format or error handling for missing sections, which could be useful but is not critical for basic usage.

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%, so the parameter descriptions already define slug, section_header, and max_length. The main description does not add new semantic information beyond the schema.

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 action (extract), resource (specific section from an article), and method (by header name). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_page (whole page) and get_page_sections (multiple sections).

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?

The description implies usage when a specific section is needed by header name, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_page_sections or search. No 'when not to use' guidance is provided.

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