Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mq-bridge

mq-bridge

by marcomq
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Hybrid

describe

Read-only

Retrieve endpoint and middleware specifications, including types, URIs, params, and config fields; optionally narrow to one entry before writing publisher or route JSON.

Instructions

Describe the endpoints and middlewares this build supports, the same data as mqb list --json / mqb describe <name> --json: each endpoint's endpoint type (the JSON key publish/start_route take), URI form, example and typed params (also its config fields), and each middleware's params. Pass name to narrow it to one entry. Call it before writing publisher or route JSON for a connector you have not used yet.

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": "describe"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoA scheme (`kafka`), alias, endpoint type (`sqlx`) or middleware (`retry`). Omit it for the whole catalog.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.3

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered; the description adds real context by clarifying that the catalog is build-specific ('this build supports'), that it mirrors `mqb list --json` output, and that it covers both endpoints and middlewares. It stops short of noting catalog size, staleness, or whether it reflects runtime registration.

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?

Front-loaded with the core statement and only three sentences, each doing work (what, how to scope, when to call). The first sentence is heavy with nested parentheticals, which slightly hurts scannability but carries genuine specification detail.

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

Completeness5/5

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

No output schema exists, so the description must carry the return-shape burden, and it does: it spells out endpoint type keys, URI form, examples, typed params/config fields, and middleware params. Combined with the scoping rule and the pre-write call recommendation, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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% and the description largely restates what the schema already says about `name` (scheme, alias, endpoint type, middleware) plus the omit-for-all behavior. The added value over the structured field is marginal, so the baseline 3 applies.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description uses a specific verb ('Describe') on a specific resource ('the endpoints and middlewares this build supports') and enumerates exactly what is returned: endpoint type keys, URI form, examples, typed params, middleware params. This is clearly distinguishable from siblings like server_info or list_routes, which concern the running server rather than the connector catalog.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Call it before writing `publisher` or `route` JSON for a connector you have not used yet,' plus how to narrow with `name`. It does not, however, relate itself to sibling tools (e.g. generate_cli_command) or say when the full catalog is preferable to a scoped call.

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