Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
RepoChatMCP

RepoChatMCP

by gzmagyari
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

chat.read_knowledge_file

Fetch paginated text from a persisted knowledge file by run ID, with adjustable line limits and offsets to read specific sections.

Instructions

Read paginated text from a specific persisted per-chunk knowledge file.

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": {
      "runId": "<runId>"
    },
    "name": "chat.read_knowledge_file"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax lines to return (default 200, max 300)
runIdYesPersisted knowledge run ID
offsetNo0-based line offset

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.11

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys pagination, read-only nature ('Read'), and file specificity, but does not mention error handling, required permissions, or behavior on invalid runId.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the action ('Read') and resource. No wasted words, clearly structured for quick scanning.

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?

The tool has only 3 simple parameters and no output schema. The description explains it reads paginated text, which is adequate for basic invocation, but lacks details on return format or edge cases and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools.

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%, with all parameters (runId, limit, offset) described in the schema. The description adds context about pagination that maps to limit/offset, but no new semantics beyond the schema. Baseline of 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 clearly states 'Read paginated text from a specific persisted per-chunk knowledge file' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes this from sibling tools like read_knowledge_batch by emphasizing 'specific' and 'per-chunk', though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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 explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool versus siblings like read_latest_knowledge or search_knowledge. The description implies use for reading a known file with pagination, but lacks exclusions or alternative recommendations.

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