Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Schema.gov.it MCP Server

Schema.gov.it MCP Server

Official
by italia
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Explore Ontology

explore_ontology
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve classes and properties from a specific ontology URI. Grouped by type, with labels for easy semantic analysis.

Instructions

List Classes and Properties defined in a specific Ontology.

Args:

  • ontologyUri: URI of the ontology (from list_ontologies)

Returns:

  • List of classes and properties with labels, grouped by type

Note: Uses URI prefix heuristic - items whose URI starts with the ontology URI.

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": {
      "ontologyUri": "<ontologyUri>"
    },
    "name": "explore_ontology"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ontologyUriYesThe URI of the Ontology (from list_ontologies)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark read-only/idempotent, and description adds the URI prefix heuristic and return structure, enhancing transparency beyond annotations.

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?

Extremely concise with bulleted args and returns; every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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?

Adequately covers purpose, usage, return, and a heuristic for a single-parameter tool, though it could mention when to use more specific siblings.

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 covers 100% of parameters, but description adds the heuristic note and clarifies the return grouping, adding value beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states the tool lists classes and properties from a specific ontology, distinguishing it from siblings like explore_classes or list_properties.

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?

Indicates the ontologyUri comes from list_ontologies, implying a prerequisite, but does not explicitly state when to use alternatives.

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