Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Fulcra MCP Server

Fulcra MCP Server

by fulcradynamics
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

get_message_check_status

Read-only

Read a selected owned message check configuration to retrieve its status; omit the ID to list available configurations.

Instructions

Read a selected owned check configuration; omit the ID to discover choices.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_message_check_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
configuration_idNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.18.7

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare this as a safe read-only operation, and the description is consistent with that by using "Read." It adds useful behavior beyond the annotations by noting that omitting the ID surfaces discoverable choices and that the configuration is "owned."

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 tight sentence with no wasted words and front-loads the main read operation. The optional discovery behavior follows immediately.

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 simple one-parameter read tool with annotations and an output schema, the description covers the essential action and the optional-ID behavior. The remaining ambiguity is mainly what a "check configuration" represents in domain terms, which the output schema may resolve.

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 0%, so the description must carry the parameter meaning. It explains the key optional behavior when the ID is omitted, but it does not clarify ID format or where an ID comes from beyond discovery by omission.

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 gives a clear verb and resource: "Read a selected owned check configuration." It is more specific than the tool name alone and implies an ownership scope. It does not explicitly differentiate from any sibling, but no sibling appears to cover the same check-configuration resource.

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 phrase "omit the ID to discover choices" gives a concrete usage condition for the optional parameter. However, it does not state when to use this tool versus alternatives or any exclusions, so the guidance is only partially developed.

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