Skip to main content
Glama
harness

Harness MCP Server

Official
by harness

harness_get

Read-only

Retrieve a Harness resource by its ID or from a URL. Auto-extracts identifiers such as org, project, and resource type from the URL.

Instructions

Get a Harness resource by ID. Accepts a Harness URL to auto-extract identifiers. For failure analysis, prefer harness_diagnose.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlNoHarness UI URL — auto-extracts org, project, type, and ID
org_idNoOrganization identifier (overrides default)
paramsNoAdditional identifiers for nested resources. Call harness_describe for fields per resource_type.
project_idNoProject identifier (overrides default)
resource_idNoPrimary resource identifier. Auto-detected from url.
resource_typeNoResource type to retrieve. Auto-detected from url.
resource_scopeNoScope to query. Use account for account-level resources and to omit org/project defaults; org injects only org; project injects org+project. Auto-detected from url.
return_download_urlNoFor execution_log only: return a directly fetchable log download URL instead of buffering log content.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. Description adds that it auto-extracts identifiers from URLs, which is useful behavioral context beyond annotations.

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?

Two sentences, no unnecessary words. Main purpose and key differentiator front-loaded.

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?

Given complexity (8 params, nested object, many resource types), description is brief. Output schema exists but not shown. Could mention using 'params' for nested resources, but schema covers that.

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%, so baseline is 3. Description adds minimal extra meaning (URL auto-extraction) beyond the schema's parameter descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states 'Get a Harness resource by ID' and mentions URL auto-extraction of identifiers. Distinguishes from sibling harness_diagnose by noting preference for failure analysis.

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?

Explicitly recommends using harness_diagnose for failure analysis, indicating when not to use this tool. However, no guidance on when to use vs other siblings like harness_describe or harness_list.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/harness/mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server