hzy9981

by hzy9981

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Hybrid

read_prompt

Retrieve the content of a specific prompt using its unique ID.

Instructions

Get the prompt content with given prompt 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": {
      "prompt_id": "<prompt_id>"
    },
    "name": "read_prompt"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`prompt_id`	Yes
`project_id`	No
`location_id`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`contents`	Yes	The combined contents of the prompt.
`promptId`	Yes	The ID of the prompt.
`displayName`	Yes	The display name of the prompt.
`systemInstruction`	Yes	The system instruction for the prompt.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 13, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description should disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'get the prompt content', implying read-only, but no mention of side effects, permissions, or limitations. Minimal transparency.

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?

Single sentence, no waste. However, it is too brief to be truly helpful—more detail would improve without damaging conciseness.

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?

Despite having an output schema (signal true), the description omits any hint about return values. With 3 parameters (including optional ones), the description should provide usage context. Far from complete.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no meaning beyond field names. Parameters like project_id and location_id are not explained (e.g., whether they filter the prompt). Utterly insufficient for a 3-parameter tool.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Get the prompt content with given prompt id.' It uses a specific verb 'get' and resource 'prompt by id', distinguishing it from siblings like list_prompts, create_prompt, etc.

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 alternatives (e.g., list_prompts for listing, update_prompt for modifying). No context or exclusions provided.

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

Deploy Server