mcp-defectdojo

by inspicere

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Remote

get_product

Retrieve product details by ID, including name, description, and product type.

Instructions

Get a single product by ID. Args: product_id (must be > 0). Returns JSON with id, name, description, prod_type fields.

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": {
      "product_id": "<product_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_product"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`product_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv3.3.2Jun 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries burden. It implies a safe read operation and specifies return fields, but doesn't disclose error handling, authentication, or rate limits. Adequate for a simple get.

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 crisp sentences that front-load the purpose, then provide parameter details and output structure. Zero wasted words.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Covers purpose, parameter constraint, and return fields. Missing error conditions or special cases, but output schema existence reduces the burden. Complete enough for a straightforward fetch.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema has 0% description coverage, but description adds constraint 'product_id (must be > 0)' and lists return fields, adding meaningful context beyond the bare integer type.

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 'Get a single product by ID,' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_engagement' or 'list_products'.

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?

Describes when to use (to retrieve a single product by ID) and implies context for alternatives like listing. However, no explicit when-not-to-use or alternative names are provided.

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