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

apollo-mcp-server

by iceycn
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

get_namespace_lock

Retrieves the current editor and lock status for a namespace, indicating if it is locked for editing in the PRO environment.

Instructions

获取 Namespace 当前编辑人/锁状态。PRO 环境有编辑锁定规则。

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_namespace_lock"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
appIdYes
envYes
clusterNameYes
namespaceNameYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It describes the purpose but fails to indicate whether this is a read-only operation, if special permissions are needed, or what the response format is. The mention of PRO environment hints at a rule but does not clarify behavior.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is very concise, consisting of two short sentences. It is front-loaded with the main purpose. However, the brevity sacrifices necessary detail.

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?

Given the lack of output schema, annotations, and parameter descriptions, the description is incomplete. It does not provide enough context for an AI agent to correctly select and invoke this tool, especially among sibling tools like 'get_namespace'.

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?

There are 4 required parameters with 0% schema description coverage. The description does not explain the meaning or expected values for any of these parameters (appId, env, clusterName, namespaceName).

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 clearly states it retrieves the current editor/lock status of a Namespace and mentions the PRO environment editing lock rules. This is a specific verb and resource, but it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'get_namespace', which might have overlapping functionality.

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 like 'get_namespace' or other lock-related tools. There is no mention of prerequisites, contexts where this tool is appropriate, or exclusions.

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