Skip to main content
Glama

manage_family

Create, read, update, or delete family records in Gramps Web. Manage parental links and child references while keeping related person records consistent.

Instructions

Create, read, update or delete Gramps Family records. Writes: create, update, delete.

action=get lists families (handle empty) or returns one family by handle. action=create posts a full Family JSON object in data; action=update PUTs data to /families/; action=delete removes it. Family payload fields: gramps_id, father_handle, mother_handle, child_ref_list, event_ref_list, attribute_list, media_list, note_list, change, relationship, ... . Creating a family rewrites its parents' and children's person records, so it requires edit + add permissions upstream.

Args: action: The operation, "get", "create", "update" or "delete". handle: Family handle (e.g. 'F0001'); required for get-one, update, delete. data: The Family object for create/update (required for those). query: Optional dict of extra query-string parameters for reads. instance: Gramps Web base URL from get_instances; default = first.

Returns: dict: {"status", "url", "data"}.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNo
queryNo
actionYes
handleNo
instanceNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it delivers: it exposes HTTP semantics (POST/PUT/DELETE/GET), the side effect that creating a family rewrites parents/children person records, and the permission requirement. It also documents the return envelope, making behavior predictable.

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?

Well-organized with a short intro, operation details, args, and returns section, and key caveats are front-loaded. The 'Writes: create, update, delete' line is mildly redundant with the opening sentence, costing a point, but the rest is efficient.

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?

The tool has 5 parameters, nested objects, no annotations, and no output schema, so the description must be self-sufficient. It covers operation modes, required fields, side effects, permissions, return shape, and cross-tool instance handling. Nothing essential for selecting and invoking the tool correctly is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, and the description fully compensates by defining every parameter: action values, handle requirements per operation, data payload requirements, query usage, and instance sourcing default from get_instances. It also provides a field list for the Family payload beyond what the schema exposes.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create, read, update or delete Gramps Family records') and enumerates the exact action values and their semantics. This distinguishes manage_family from sibling CRUD tools like manage_person/manage_event by resource type and operation.

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?

Gives clear operational context: which action to use for listing vs single fetch, which params are required per action, and notes that creating requires edit+add permissions upstream. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or state when not to use this tool, so it stops short of a 5.

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