action1-mcp-server

Get details of a specific endpoint

action1_get_automation_script_output

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve raw automation-script output for a specific automation instance and endpoint ID, including unfiltered stdout details for troubleshooting and verification.

Instructions

Raw automation-script output struct. For filtered stdout (status markers stripped) prefer action1_get_automation_output (curated). Get details of a specific endpoint. Gets details about the automation instance applied to an endpoint specified by its ID. Perm: view_automations.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`org_id`	No	Org UUID.
`verbose`	No	Skip per-item compactor.
`endpoint_id`	Yes	Provide an endpoint ID.
`instance_id`	Yes	Provide a specific instance ID.
`response_format`	No	Output format. Default markdown.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`note`	No
`count`	Yes
`items`	Yes
`total`	No
`truncated`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedv0.6.0Oct 26, 2026

changedInput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

changedOutput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

changedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Previous value: -trueNew value: +{}
```

addedOutput schema / properties / items / items / properties

Added value: +{
+  "action_id": {},
+  "action_name": {},
+  "description": {},
+  "id": {},
+  "self": {},
+  "status": {},
+  "time": {},
+  "type": {}
+}

First observedv0.5.0Jun 27, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), so the description's value-add here is the permission requirement 'Perm: view_automations' and the raw-vs-curated output distinction, both of which an agent needs before calling. It does not discuss pagination or size constraints on raw output, which would be the next useful layer.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The raw-vs-curated routing sentence is well front-loaded, but the two sentences 'Get details of a specific endpoint.' and 'Gets details about the automation instance applied to an endpoint specified by its ID.' restate each other with different meanings, which is waste that actively creates ambiguity rather than resolving it.

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

Completeness3/5

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

An output schema exists, so return shape need not be explained, and the auth scope plus the alternative tool are given. What is missing is a coherent statement of what the tool actually returns and how it differs from get_automation_results/get_automation_status, and the contradictory endpoint-details phrasing leaves the agent without a reliable mental model.

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 coverage is 100%, so instance_id, endpoint_id, org_id, verbose, and response_format are all documented in the schema; the baseline of 3 applies. The description only implicitly reinforces that both an instance and an endpoint identifier are involved and adds nothing about 'verbose' (skip per-item compactor) or response_format.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The opening 'Raw automation-script output struct' plus the explicit contrast with the curated sibling gives a usable sense of what comes back, but 'Get details of a specific endpoint' (also the title) is misleading copy that suggests endpoint inventory data rather than automation output. The name, title, and body describe three slightly different things, forcing the agent to reconcile them.

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 names a concrete alternative and the exact condition that selects it: prefer action1_get_automation_output when filtered stdout with status markers stripped is wanted, implying this one is for unprocessed output. It does not address the other adjacent siblings (get_automation_results, get_automation_status, list_instance_endpoint_results), so coverage is clear but not exhaustive.

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

Deploy Server