Skip to main content
Glama
GPX MCP Server
by gpxco

Show a group

get_group
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a single device group by ID to inspect its details, then use list_group_members to view the devices assigned to it.

Instructions

Show a group

Returns one device group. Its devices are listed with list_group_members. The group's page in the GPX app is https://app.gpx.co/groups/{id}.

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": {
      "groupId": "<groupId>"
    },
    "name": "get_group"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
groupIdYesThe group id, from `list_groups`.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.3

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the description only needs to add context beyond that. It does: it tells the agent that device membership is not returned here and must be fetched separately, and it gives the app URL for the group, both of which prevent incorrect assumptions about the response.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns, then the redirect to the members tool, then a practical link. Nothing is redundant with the title and no sentence is filler.

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 single-parameter read with full schema coverage and annotations, the description covers return shape, related-data routing, and even a user-facing URL. It stops short of listing the group's fields, but with no output schema that omission is small rather than disqualifying.

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 only parameter, `groupId`, is already documented as coming from `list_groups`. The prose adds no format, range, or error-handling detail beyond the schema, so this is the baseline case where the schema does the work.

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?

"Returns one device group" states a specific verb and resource type, and naming `list_group_members` as the source of the group's devices separates it from the list-style siblings. The remaining ambiguity is minor: it doesn't say what attributes of the group come back, but an agent can still distinguish this from `list_groups` and `get_device` without opening a schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description makes clear this is the single-group fetch, redirects device enumeration to `list_group_members`, and the schema ties `groupId` to `list_groups`. That's clear context and an explicit alternative, but there are no exclusions or guidance on when not to call it (e.g. batching multiple ids).

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.