Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MYOB Codex MCP

MYOB Codex MCP

by jaeko44
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

myob_raw_get

Fetch data from any MYOB Business API endpoint via GET. Read-only access ensures safe retrieval.

Instructions

Read any MYOB Business API endpoint with GET. This tool is read-only.

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": {
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "myob_raw_get"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes
paramsNo
business_idNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does state 'read-only,' which is a key safety trait, but it does not discuss authentication requirements, error behavior, parameter handling, or response formats. This is minimal transparency for a raw endpoint tool.

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—two short sentences. However, the second sentence ('This tool is read-only') is largely redundant with 'Read' in the first sentence, so it slightly wastes words, though it is still tightly structured.

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?

This is a raw, generic GET tool with three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description fails to cover how the parameters interact, what constitutes a valid path, expected return structure, or any operational caveats, making it highly incomplete for its complexity.

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?

The schema has zero description coverage, and the description does not explain any of the three parameters (path, params, business_id). The agent is left to infer their meaning from names alone, which is insufficient for a raw API tool.

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 function: reading any MYOB Business API endpoint via GET. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that target specific entities (e.g., myob_invoice_get, myob_account_list) and from mutation tools like myob_raw_prepare_mutation.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this raw GET tool versus dedicated list/get tools, nor does it mention exclusions or alternatives. It simply states the action, leaving the agent without contextual selection criteria.

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