Skip to main content
Glama

manage_person

Create, fetch, update, or delete Gramps person records using this API tool. Supports listing, retrieval by handle, and full CRUD operations with schema-compliant payloads.

Instructions

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

action=get lists people (handle empty, paginated) or returns one person (handle set, ?profile=&extend= via query). action=create posts a full Person JSON object in data (handles are assigned by the server). action=update PUTs data to /people/; action=delete removes it. Person payload fields follow the Gramps schema (gramps_id, gender, primary_name, names, event_ref_list, family_list, person_ref_list, attribute_list, media_list, address_list, url_list, note_list, change, ...).

Args: action: The operation, "get", "create", "update" or "delete". handle: Person handle (e.g. 'P0001'); required for get-one, update, delete. data: The Person object for create/update (required for those). query: Optional dict of extra query-string parameters (e.g. {"page": 1, "pagesize": 20, "keys": "handle,name", "strip": true, "profile": "all", "extend": "all", "locale": "en"}). instance: Gramps Web base URL from get_instances; default = first.

Returns: dict: {"status": , "url": , "data": <object(s) | transaction>}.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNo
queryNo
actionYes
handleNo
instanceNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description correctly carries the burden of disclosing side effects: it labels create/update/delete as writes and states that delete removes the record. It also discloses server-assigned handles and that GET with a handle returns one person while an empty handle lists people.

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 well-structured with a one-line purpose, action bullets, Args, and Returns headers, making it easy to scan. The 'Writes: create, update, delete' line is somewhat redundant with the opening sentence, but it is short and does not materially bloat the text.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a CRUD tool with minimal schema, no annotations, and no output schema, the description covers the core invocation contract: supported actions, parameter roles, expected payload shape, query options, instance selection, and return dict structure. It does not enumerate every Gramps schema field, but explicitly defers to the Gramps schema and gives representative fields.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the Args section compensates fully, adding meaning for all 5 parameters: action options, handle requirements, data object content, query dictionary examples, and instance default. It also specifies which parameters are required for which action, going well beyond the schema's minimal type-only properties.

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 opens with 'Create, read, update or delete Gramps Person records,' naming a specific verb set and resource. The action-by-action breakdown (get/create/update/delete) and reference to Person payload fields makes it clearly distinct from the sibling manage_* tools for other record types.

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 gives clear context for when to use manage_person: any Person record CRUD operation, with action-specific usage (`get` for list/one, `create` for new, etc.). It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling names manage_family/manage_source make the resource boundary obvious.

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