Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Spring Toolkit MCP

Spring Toolkit MCP

by giaffa86
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_integration_graph

Retrieve the integration graph from Spring Boot Actuator to visualize runtime message flows and component connections.

Instructions

Read /actuator/integrationgraph.

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_integration_graph"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
applicationNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Only says 'Read', implying read-only operation. No disclosure of authentication needs, rate limits, performance impact, or response size. No annotations to supplement.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Extremely short (one sentence) with no wasted words, but lacks critical details. Conciseness is not a virtue when it comes at the cost of usefulness.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given 1 parameter, no output schema, no annotations, and numerous similar siblings, the description is incomplete. It fails to define the integration graph or explain the 'application' parameter, leaving the agent underinformed.

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?

The one parameter 'application' is not described at all. With 0% schema description coverage, the agent receives no help understanding what it does or how to use it.

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?

Description clearly states 'Read /actuator/integrationgraph', specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools by naming the exact endpoint, but doesn't explain what the integration graph represents.

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 on when to use this tool versus the many similar actuator reader siblings. No context about use cases or exclusions.

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