dendrite-admin-mcp

Get a registration token

get_registration_token

Fetch details for a specific registration token, including its validity and usage, to manage user registration access in a Dendrite Matrix server.

Instructions

Fetch details of a single registration token.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "token": "<token>"
    },
    "name": "get_registration_token"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`token`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 7, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a read-only operation ('Fetch'), which is a useful safety signal, but it does not disclose error behavior, required permissions, or what 'details' includes. The vagueness of 'details' leaves some behavioral aspects unspecified.

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 one concise sentence that immediately conveys the action and object. Every word contributes value, with no redundancy or filler.

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?

The tool is simple (one parameter, no output schema), but the description is vague about what 'details' are returned and does not cover possible error conditions or output format. While adequate as a minimal description, it leaves significant gaps given the absence of an output schema and annotations.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has a single parameter 'token' with no description, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description does not explain the meaning or format of the token parameter; it merely repeats the word 'token' without clarifying whether it is an ID, the token string itself, or how it should be provided. It fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 the specific verb 'Fetch' and identifies the resource as 'details of a single registration token', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_registration_tokens, create_registration_token, and delete_registration_token. It unambiguously states the action and scope.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies this tool is for fetching one specific registration token, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus list_registration_tokens or provide any exclusions or alternative recommendations. Usage context is inferred from the word 'single' rather than explicitly stated.

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

Deploy Server