Skip to main content
Glama
nerdit-ai

Nerdit

Official
by nerdit-ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_project

Retrieve a project's services, deployment state, endpoints, referenced models/databases, readiness flags, and public addresses before deploying or diagnosing issues.

Instructions

The one-call picture of a project: read this before you deploy or diagnose.

    Returns the project's services with their state, last deploy and
    endpoint; the models and databases they reference with a readiness
    flag (``null`` when readiness cannot be judged without a secret); every
    public address under ``addresses``; and ``home``, the node it lives on
    (always this node today). A name outside your scope is 403; an unknown
    name is 404. Secret values never appear here.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesImmutable prj_ ID or name of an existing project. Prefer the ID from list_projects: a retired ID never addresses a same-name replacement.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses 403 for out-of-scope names, 404 for unknown names, that secret values never appear, that readiness may be null when a secret is needed, and that home is always this node today. Missing only a clear statement that this is a read-only, non-mutating call and any freshness/caching caveat.

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?

Opens with the one-line value proposition, then front-loads the return inventory and closes with error and secrecy caveats. No sentence is filler; the markup-heavy phrasing is dense but each clause carries distinct information.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must describe the return shape and it does so comprehensively, down to the nested readiness flag and the addresses/home fields. Combined with error semantics and the secret-exclusion guarantee, an agent has everything needed to call this 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 coverage is 100% and the schema itself already explains the immutable prj_ ID vs name tradeoff and the retired-ID trap, leaving little for the description to add. The 403/404 mentions give peripheral meaning to name resolution but no additional format or syntax detail, so baseline 3 is right.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource and enumerates exactly what comes back: services with state/last deploy/endpoint, referenced models and databases with readiness, public addresses, and home node. This is clearly distinguishable from narrower siblings like get_service, list_services, or diagnose_project.

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?

"Read this before you deploy or diagnose" gives clear situational context that ties it to deploy/diagnose_project siblings. It stops short of naming those alternatives or stating when-not to use it (e.g. when you only need one service's logs), so it is strong but not fully explicit routing.

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