Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
HR Assist MCP Server

HR Assist MCP Server

by omkarg01
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_employee_details

Retrieve employee details by providing a full or partial name. Returns contact, role, and other information.

Instructions

Get employee details by name (or partial name). :param name: Name of the employee, e.g. "Tony" or "Sarah Johnson" :return: Employee details

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "get_employee_details"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided. Description only states 'Get employee details' without specifying what details are returned, whether it's case-sensitive, or behavior on no match. Output schema exists but description doesn't reference it.

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?

Very short and front-loaded. Two lines cover purpose and parameter. However, docstring style adds a bit of redundancy with the schema.

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?

For a simple tool with one param and an output schema, the description is adequate but not thorough. Missing behavioral context like null returns or fuzzy matching. Siblings like list_employees hint at a different use case.

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 0%. Description adds meaning by explaining the 'name' parameter as employee name (full or partial) with examples, but lacks details on matching rules or format.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Get', resource 'employee details', and specifies searching by name or partial name. This distinguishes it from siblings like list_employees (which lists all) and add_employee.

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?

Implies use when you have a name/partial name to look up, but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use (e.g., comparing with list_employees) or prerequisites. No alternatives mentioned.

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