Retrieve a single OpenProject wiki page by ID to access project documentation and content directly.
Get a single wiki page by id.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| wiki_page_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | ||
| title | Yes | ||
| content | Yes | ||
| project | Yes | ||
| project_id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
v0.3.7Input schema / additionalPropertiesAdded value: +falseOutput schema / properties / attachments_urlRemoved value: -{
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ],
- "title": "Attachments Url"
-}Output schema / properties / urlRemoved value: -{
- "title": "Url",
- "type": "string"
-}Output schema / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "id",
- "title",
- "project_id",
- "project",
- "content",
- "attachments_url",
- "url"
-]New value: +[
+ "id",
+ "title",
+ "project_id",
+ "project",
+ "content"
+]v0.3.3v0.3.0v0.2.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description is the sole source of behavioral information. It conveys a simple read-only 'get' operation, but does not disclose behavior for nonexistent IDs, permission issues, or error conditions.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is one short sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word earns its place and there is no redundant detail.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple one-parameter getter with an output schema, the description is largely complete. It could mention that the ID must reference an existing wiki page or note access restrictions, but those are not required given the tool's simplicity.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description only adds 'by id' without explicitly naming or elaborating on wiki_page_id. The single parameter's title and integer type are self-explanatory, making the minimal description adequate but not enriching.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
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 'wiki page', and the scope 'single ... by id'. This is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools that target other resources.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The phrase 'by id' implies that the tool should be used when a wiki page ID is already known, but there is no explicit when-to-use versus alternatives guidance or exclusionary context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/jtauschl/openproject-ce-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server