Skip to main content
Glama
mmarubio1

Relaystation

by mmarubio1
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

read_baton

Retrieve a baton's content and metadata with owner ID or collaborator token; small entries return inline, large ones provide a presigned download URL or pagination hint. No per-call charge.

Instructions

Read a baton's content + metadata. FREE (reads draw down the prepaid egress budget, no per-call charge). Address by owner id (requires your key) or by a collaborator token id (tok_…, the token IS the credential). Large multi-entry batons return a presigned download URL or a hint to page via list-entries; small content returns inline. Example: read_baton {id:"bat_"}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesBaton id, or a collaborator token id (tok_…).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden and meets it: it reveals the no-per-call-charge/egress-budget behavior, credential semantics, and conditional response behavior (presigned URL/page hint vs inline). This goes well beyond a bare read-only statement.

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 front-loaded with purpose and each sentence adds distinct operational information: cost, addressing, response behavior, and an example. It is slightly denser than necessary but still well-structured and free of filler.

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?

For a single-parameter read operation with no output schema, the description covers auth, cost, and high-level return formats, including how large results are handled. Nothing needed to correctly invoke the tool is missing.

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 schema already describes the single id parameter at 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context beyond the schema: owner id requires your key, tok_ is itself the credential, and bat_<id> is the example format.

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 starts with a specific verb and resource ('Read a baton's content + metadata'), making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It also supplies concrete addressing modes and an example, which distinguish it from baton-creation and mutation siblings like create_baton and append_to_baton.

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 clearly states the two ways to address a baton (owner id with key, collaborator token) and explains the large-vs-small response path, routing to list-entries for paging. It does not explicitly name an excluded sibling or say 'use X instead,' but the contextual cues are strong enough.

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