Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
kernl

kernl

by fastslack
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

kernel_projects_get

Retrieve a single project by ID or slug to view its summary, linked resources, and the offices serving it.

Instructions

Show one project: brief, linked resources and the offices that serve it.

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": {
      "project": "<project>"
    },
    "name": "kernel_projects_get"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectYesProject id or slug

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.5.1

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Show' signals a non-mutating read and the sentence usefully discloses what the response contains (brief, linked resources, offices), but nothing is said about permissions, behavior on an unknown id, or cost/latency.

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?

A single sentence with no filler, and the primary action ('Show one project') is front-loaded ahead of the payload enumeration.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the essentials by enumerating what comes back, which is the main thing an agent cannot learn from structured fields. It stops short of noting not-found behavior or whether linked resources are expanded or just referenced.

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 description coverage is 100% and the single 'project' parameter is documented in the schema as 'Project id or slug'. The description adds only that exactly one project is resolved, which is consistent but not additive; baseline 3 applies.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description uses a specific verb ('Show') and a bounded resource ('one project'), and names the payload (brief, linked resources, serving offices). That implicitly contrasts with the sibling list tool, though it never names an alternative to disambiguate explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied by 'one project' – an agent can infer this is the single-record fetch versus a list, but there is no statement of when to prefer it, no prerequisite (e.g., needing an id or slug first), and no exclusions or failure guidance.

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