Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
apollo-mcp-server

apollo-mcp-server

by iceycn
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

get_item

Retrieve a specific configuration item from Apollo Configuration Center by providing app ID, environment, cluster, namespace, and key.

Instructions

获取单个配置项。

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": {
      "appId": "<appId>",
      "env": "<env>",
      "clusterName": "<clusterName>",
      "namespaceName": "<namespaceName>",
      "key": "<key>"
    },
    "name": "get_item"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
appIdYes
envYes
clusterNameYes
namespaceNameYes
keyYes配置 key；非 properties 格式固定为 content

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'get a single configuration item,' revealing nothing about permissions, side effects, or return characteristics. The tool likely reads data, but this is not explicitly stated.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely concise (one short sentence) but fails to convey needed information. Brevity here sacrifices clarity and utility, making it under-specified rather than efficiently concise.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given 5 required parameters and no output schema, the description is drastically incomplete. It does not explain what a 'configuration item' is, what the response looks like, or any error conditions. The tool's complexity demands a richer description.

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 only 20% (only 'key' has a description). The tool description adds no parameter meaning. The four other required parameters (appId, env, clusterName, namespaceName) are left completely unexplained, which is inadequate given the low coverage.

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 '获取单个配置项' clearly states the tool retrieves a single configuration item. The verb and resource are specific, and the sibling tools (e.g., list_items, get_namespace) help distinguish its purpose.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_items or get_latest_release, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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