Skip to main content
Glama

Get Skill Details

get_skill_details
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve detailed information for a specific skill using its Lightcast ID, with an optional version parameter to access the exact skill data you need for analysis.

Instructions

Get a skill by its Lightcast ID.

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": {
      "skill_id": "<skill_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_skill_details"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
versionNolatest
skill_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.1

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: it does not say what happens with an unknown or malformed skill ID (error vs empty result), nor what 'version' controls or whether a stale version yields different data.

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 efficient rather than bloated, though the brevity leaves it underspecified for a two-parameter tool.

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

Completeness2/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. However, for a tool with an undocumented 'version' parameter and no stated behavior on invalid IDs, the one-sentence description is not complete enough for reliable invocation.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% for 2 parameters, so the description must compensate and does so only partially. It clarifies that skill_id is a Lightcast ID (useful, implies taxonomy-scoped identifiers), but the 'version' parameter with default 'latest' is entirely unexplained in both schema and description.

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?

States a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('a skill') and adds the key qualifier that lookup is keyed on a Lightcast ID, which distinguishes it from text-based lookups like extract_skills_from_text. It does not distinguish itself from retrieval siblings such as bulk_retrieve_skills or get_related_skills, which is why 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 guidance on when to choose this tool versus bulk_retrieve_skills (multiple skills), find_similar_skills (fuzzy matching), or get_related_skills. The agent must infer from the name alone that this is the single-record, exact-ID retrieval path.

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