Skip to main content
Glama

manage_type

List Gramps type vocabularies, both default and custom, for all object types, to retrieve the controlled values used in type fields for genealogy data.

Instructions

List Gramps type vocabularies (custom + default) for all object types. Read-only.

Enumerates the controlled vocabularies used across the schema, e.g. event types, name types, place types, child reference types, gender types. action=all merges default and custom types (GET /types/); action=defaults lists every default vocabulary; action=default returns one vocabulary (e.g. 'event_types'); action=default_map returns its machine-readable mapping (standard key -> localized string); action=customs lists every custom vocabulary; action=custom returns one. Datatypes include: event_types, event_role_types, name_types, name_origin_types, place_types, note_types, repository_types, source_attribute_types, source_media_types, url_types, attribute_types, family_relation_types, child_reference_types, gender_types (+ person/family/media/event attribute_types on custom). Values are the strings Gramps objects use in their type fields.

Args: action: "all", "defaults", "default", "default_map", "customs" or "custom". datatype: Vocabulary name (e.g. 'event_types'); required for default, default_map, custom. locale: If true, translate default type names to the server locale. instance: Gramps Web base URL from get_instances; default = first.

Returns: dict: {"status", "url", "data": vocabulary dict or list}.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionNoall
localeNo
datatypeNo
instanceNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description explicitly states the tool is read-only, which is important behavioral context. It also discloses that 'action=all' merges default and custom types, and that 'locale' translates default type names. While there are no annotations to contradict, the description could add more about error cases or rate limits, but it covers the key behavioral traits well.

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 detailed but well-organized, with a clear opening summary, a list of actions, and a parameter breakdown. It is longer than minimal but every sentence adds value. The structure (summary, action list, datatypes, args, returns) makes it easy to scan.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (4 parameters, 6 action modes, no output schema), the description is quite complete. It explains the return shape ('status', 'url', 'data'), enumerates datatypes, and covers all parameters. It could mention potential errors or the exact structure of the returned vocabulary dict, but overall it's sufficient for an agent to call it correctly.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden of explaining parameters. It does this well: 'action' is fully enumerated, 'datatype' is explained with examples and when it's required, 'locale' is described, and 'instance' is tied to get_instances. The only minor gap is not detailing the exact format of the 'instance' parameter beyond 'base URL'.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: listing Gramps type vocabularies (custom + default) for all object types, and explicitly notes it is read-only. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on type vocabularies rather than managing specific records like persons, families, or events.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool and how to select among its actions. It enumerates each action value ('all', 'defaults', 'default', 'default_map', 'customs', 'custom') and explains what each returns, plus when 'datatype' is required. This is comprehensive usage guidance.

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