mcp-daktela

by hajekd

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Remote

get_sms

Retrieve full details of a specific SMS activity by its ID, providing complete message information for easy lookup.

Instructions

Get full details of a single SMS activity by its ID.

Args: name: The SMS activity ID (e.g. 'ACT00123' or the 'name' field from list_sms_chats).

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "get_sms"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.0Aug 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Get full details' implies a read operation, but it does not specify what details are included, any prerequisites, or potential side effects. It is not misleading, but it is minimal.

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 two sentences: the first states the purpose, the second explains the parameter. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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

Completeness5/5

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

The tool is simple with a single parameter and an output schema. The description covers the purpose and the parameter meaning, and the output schema handles return values. It is complete for the tool's complexity.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema only defines 'name' as a string, but the description explains it is the SMS activity ID, provides a concrete example ('ACT00123'), and mentions it can be obtained from list_sms_chats. This fully compensates for the 0% schema coverage.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description states 'Get full details of a single SMS activity by its ID' with a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling getters like get_call or get_email by the SMS context. It unambiguously identifies what the tool does.

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 implies the tool should be used when you have an SMS activity ID and need full details, and it points to list_sms_chats as a source for the ID. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear and the mention of list_sms_chats provides implicit guidance.

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