Skip to main content
Glama

Get Pathways Metadata

get_pathways_metadata
Read-onlyIdempotent

Discover career-pathway dimensions, categories, nations, and taxonomy versions to identify valid filters and structure Lightcast career-pathway data.

Instructions

Discover career-pathway dimensions, categories, nations, and taxonomy versions.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_pathways_metadata"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.1

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and openWorld, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds only the content scope (which taxonomy facets are exposed), which is genuinely useful for deciding whether to call it. It says nothing about pagination, size, or caching behavior, but with an output schema present that is a modest gap.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is arguably too terse for the number of sibling metadata tools, but nothing in it wastes space.

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?

With zero parameters, a full annotation set, and an output schema, the description only needs to convey scope — which it does by listing the four facet types. The main missing element is routing guidance relative to the other metadata endpoints, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to document; the baseline for a 0-param tool applies. The description does not need to compensate for any schema gaps here.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description names the specific resource domain (career-pathway metadata) and enumerates the facets returned: dimensions, categories, nations, and taxonomy versions. That is enough for an agent to know this is a discovery/enumeration call rather than a data-retrieval call. It does not distinguish itself from the many sibling *_metadata tools (benchmark, classification, skills, titles), so it falls short of a 5.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no sibling is named as an alternative for adjacent metadata lookups. The verb 'Discover' only weakly implies this is a pre-query exploration step. An agent must infer the usage context entirely.

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