Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-lindoai

mcp-lindoai

Official
by lindoai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussions(1)Admin
JavaScript
Remote

Get Page Details

get_page
Read-only

Retrieve details of a specific page from a website using its ID. Access page information managed by Lindo AI.

Instructions

Get page details.

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": {
      "website_id": "<website_id>",
      "page_id": "<page_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_page"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
page_idYesThe page ID
website_idYesThe website ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.0.17
  2. Removedv1.0.16
  3. First observedv1.0.14

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already convey that the tool is read-only and non-destructive. The description adds no extra behavioral context (e.g., return format, permissions). It does not contradict annotations.

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?

The description is extremely concise, consisting of a single sentence. It is front-loaded with the key purpose, but could benefit from a bit more detail without becoming verbose.

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?

Given the absence of an output schema, the description should indicate what details are returned (e.g., metadata, fields). It fails to do so, leaving the output ambiguous.

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 description coverage is 100%; each parameter has a clear description in the schema. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the purpose: 'Get page details.' It uses a specific verb and resource, but does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_page_html' or 'check_page_status', which have overlapping names.

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 use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't explain when to use 'get_page' instead of 'get_page_html' or 'check_page_status', or mention any prerequisites or context.

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