Skip to main content
Glama

wiki_get

Retrieve Wikipedia articles by title and language to access encyclopedic information for research or reference.

Instructions

Alias of wiki.get

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleYes
langNo

Implementation Reference

  • The core handler function that fetches and returns Wikipedia page summary using the public REST API.
    export async function wikiGet(title: string, lang = 'vi') {
      const url = `https://${lang}.wikipedia.org/api/rest_v1/page/summary/${encodeURIComponent(title)}`;
      const res = await fetchWithLimits(url, 8000, 1024*1024);
      if (!res.body) return null;
      const data = JSON.parse(res.body.toString('utf-8'));
      return {
        title: data.title,
        url: data.content_urls?.desktop?.page || data.canonical || '',
        abstract: data.extract || '',
        source: 'wikipedia',
        updatedAt: data.timestamp || new Date().toISOString()
      };
    }
  • src/server.ts:218-223 (registration)
    MCP server registration for the 'wiki_get' tool, invoking the wikiGet handler and formatting response.
    server.tool('wiki_get', 'Alias of wiki.get',
      wikiGetShape, OPEN,
      async ({ title, lang }) => {
        const res = await wikiGet(title, lang || 'vi');
        return { content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(res) }] };
      }
  • Input schema validation using Zod for the wiki_get tool parameters.
    const wikiGetShape = { title: z.string(), lang: z.string().optional() };
Behavior3/5

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

The description adds no behavioral information beyond what the annotation provides. The annotation 'openWorldHint: true' already indicates this tool may return incomplete results, but the description doesn't elaborate on this behavior or add any other context about rate limits, authentication needs, or operational characteristics. However, it doesn't contradict the annotation, so it avoids the lowest score.

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?

The description is maximally concise at just three words, with zero wasted language. It's front-loaded with the only information it provides (the alias relationship). While severely under-specified, what's present is efficiently 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?

Given the tool has 2 parameters with 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and only one annotation, the description is completely inadequate. It doesn't explain what the tool does, how to use its parameters, what it returns, or when to choose it over alternatives. For a tool with undocumented parameters and no output specification, this minimal description fails to provide necessary context.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage for both parameters, the description carries full responsibility for explaining parameter meaning but provides absolutely no information about what 'title' and 'lang' represent, their expected formats, or how they affect the tool's operation. The description doesn't compensate for the complete lack of schema documentation.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Alias of wiki.get' is a tautology that merely restates the tool name in a different format without explaining what the tool actually does. It doesn't specify what resource it operates on or what action it performs, failing to distinguish it from its sibling 'wiki.get' which appears to be the same tool. While it hints at equivalence with another tool, it doesn't provide functional clarity.

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 tool versus alternatives. It doesn't explain why one would choose 'wiki_get' over 'wiki.get' (which appears identical) or when to use it versus other wiki/search tools like 'wiki.search' or 'wiki_search'. There's no context about appropriate use cases or prerequisites for invocation.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/khanhs-234/tool4lm'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server