Skip to main content
Glama

get_joomla_articles

Retrieve all articles from a Joomla website to access and manage content directly through the MCP server.

Instructions

Retrieve all articles from the Joomla website.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • main.py:59-78 (handler)
    The main handler function for the 'get_joomla_articles' tool. It is registered using the @mcp.tool decorator. This async function makes an authenticated GET request to the Joomla articles API endpoint and returns the JSON response if successful, or an error message otherwise.
    @mcp.tool(description="Retrieve all articles from the Joomla website.")
    async def get_joomla_articles() -> str:
        """Retrieve all articles from the Joomla website via its API."""
        try:
            headers = {
                "Accept": "application/vnd.api+json",
                "User-Agent": "JoomlaArticlesMCP/1.0",
                "Authorization": f"Bearer {BEARER_TOKEN}",
            }
            async with httpx.AsyncClient() as client:
                response = await client.get(JOOMLA_ARTICLES_API_URL, headers=headers)
            if response.status_code == 200:
                return response.text
            else:
                return f"Failed to fetch articles: HTTP {response.status_code} - {response.text}"
        except httpx.HTTPError as e:
            return f"Error fetching articles: {str(e)}"
        except Exception as e:
            return f"Unexpected error: {str(e)}"
  • main.py:59-59 (registration)
    The @mcp.tool decorator registers the 'get_joomla_articles' function as an MCP tool with the specified description.
    @mcp.tool(description="Retrieve all articles from the Joomla website.")
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states 'retrieve all articles' but doesn't specify whether this returns all articles at once or uses pagination, what authentication is required, rate limits, or what happens with large datasets. For a read operation with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral questions unanswered.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states what the tool does without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple retrieval tool and front-loads the essential information.

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?

Given the tool has zero parameters, 100% schema coverage, and an output schema exists, the description's job is simplified. However, for a retrieval operation with no annotations, it should ideally mention something about the return format or data scope. The current description is minimally adequate but could provide more context about what 'all articles' entails.

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 tool has zero parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already fully documents the parameter situation. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters since none exist, maintaining focus on the tool's purpose without unnecessary detail.

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 action ('retrieve') and resource ('all articles from the Joomla website'), making the tool's purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'get_joomla_categories', but the resource specificity provides adequate distinction for a read operation.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_joomla_categories' or 'create_article'. It doesn't mention prerequisites, limitations, or appropriate contexts for selecting this retrieval method over other options.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/nasoma/joomla-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server