Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ecu-harness

ecu-harness

by omaratif1995
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Read elements

ecu_get
Read-onlyIdempotent

Read AUTOSAR ECU configuration elements by path to retrieve values, references, and children; query multiple paths in one call with optional XML text and depth.

Instructions

Read elements by path: values, references, children. Several paths separated by spaces are read in one call.

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": {
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "ecu_get"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
rawNoAlso return the element's XML text (max 2000 characters).
pathYesAUTOSAR path such as /ActiveEcuC/Com/ComConfig or Com/ComConfig; or several.
depthNo0 = list child names (default), 1-3 = include children with their values.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds what the read yields (values, references, children) and that multi-path reads are supported in one call, but says nothing about behavior on invalid paths or how depth interacts with the returned payload.

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?

Two short clauses, front-loaded with the action and resource, with no filler. The "values, references, children" triple is slightly compressed and reads closer to a raw hint than a specification, which keeps it off a 5.

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?

With no output schema, the description must convey what a call returns, and it only gestures at this with a three-item list. For a read tool with three parameters and no documented error or emptiness behavior, an agent still lacks a clear picture of the response shape at each depth.

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 description coverage is 100%, including the enum-like semantics of depth (0 = child names, 1-3 = children with values) and the raw XML cap, so the schema carries the burden. The description's "values, references, children" loosely echoes the depth behavior but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"Read elements by path" names a specific verb and resource, and the follow-up enumerates what is returned (values, references, children). It never names the sibling it should be distinguished from, such as ecu_find for searching or ecu_describe for metadata, so an agent must infer the routing.

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 batching hint ("Several paths separated by spaces are read in one call") is genuine usage guidance for how to call efficiently, but there is no statement of when to prefer this over ecu_find or ecu_describe, nor any precondition such as needing a loaded/validated model.

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