Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
CVAT MCP

CVAT MCP

by jangjs1216
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

cvat_get_request

Retrieve the status and details of a CVAT background request by ID to monitor imports, exports, or data uploads.

Instructions

Get a CVAT background request by id from GET /api/requests/{id}; useful after imports, exports, or data upload.

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": {
      "requestId": "<requestId>"
    },
    "name": "cvat_get_request"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
requestIdYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided. Description implies read-only operation via 'Get', but lacks details on side effects, error handling, or auth requirements, which is acceptable for a simple GET with no 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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with action and purpose, no fluff, highly efficient.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Covers purpose and usage context, but lacks description of return value or output structure; no output schema provided, so agent may need to infer response format.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema has zero description coverage; description adds endpoint context ('from GET /api/requests/{id}') but does not explain the nature or format of requestId beyond what schema provides.

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 verb 'Get', the resource 'CVAT background request', and the endpoint, while specifying useful contexts like imports/exports, distinguishing it from other get tools.

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?

Provides clear usage context ('useful after imports, exports, or data upload'), but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention 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