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

apollo-mcp-server

by iceycn
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

get_latest_release

Retrieves the currently effective published configuration for a specified namespace in Apollo Configuration Center, providing access to the active configuration state.

Instructions

获取 Namespace 当前生效的已发布配置。

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>"
    },
    "name": "get_latest_release"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
appIdYes
envYes
clusterNameYes
namespaceNameYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention whether the operation is read-only, what constitutes 'currently effective', or any side effects. The description is minimal and leaves behavior largely unspecified.

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?

The description is a single sentence, which is concise, but it lacks necessary details to be fully effective. It is front-loaded with the core action but sacrifices completeness for brevity.

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 the tool has 4 required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain the return value, how to use it in a workflow, or any constraints like parameter dependencies.

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%, placing the full burden on the description to explain parameters. The description provides no information about the four required parameters ('appId', 'env', 'clusterName', 'namespaceName'), relying solely on their names for meaning.

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 purpose: retrieving the currently effective published configuration for a Namespace. It uses a specific verb-resource combination ('get the... configuration') and distinguishes from siblings like 'get_item' or 'get_namespace' by specifying 'latest release'.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit guidelines on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The context of sibling tools suggests it is for retrieving the active release configuration, but there is no mention of when not to use it or which sibling to choose instead.

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