Skip to main content
Glama
@opensmm/mcp-server

@opensmm/mcp-server

Official

Get service details

get_service
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve full details for a specific service, including rate, rate basis, min/max order limits, parameters, and refill or cancellation support. Use the service ID from search results.

Instructions

Full details of one service: rate, rateBasis, min/max, parameters, refill/cancel support.

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": {
      "serviceId": "<serviceId>"
    },
    "name": "get_service"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
serviceIdYesService id from search_services

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description adds value by disclosing which fields the response surfaces, but says nothing about error behavior when an unknown serviceId is supplied or about response size.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single front-loaded sentence with the resource first and the returned fields enumerated after the colon. No filler, no repetition of the title or annotations.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, naming the returned fields (rate, rateBasis, min/max, parameters, refill/cancel support) is exactly the context an agent needs to judge whether the call is worth making. Missing only error/not-found behavior.

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 coverage is 100% for the single serviceId parameter, so the schema already carries the pattern constraint and the 'from search_services' provenance note. The description adds no additional meaning about the parameter, which is the expected baseline at full schema coverage.

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?

Uses a specific verb and resource ('Full details of one service') and enumerates what those details are: rate, rateBasis, min/max, parameters, refill/cancel support. The singular 'one service' implicitly separates it from the list-style sibling search_services, but no sibling is named explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no mention of the prerequisite that a serviceId comes from a prior lookup (that hint lives only in the schema). The agent must infer from 'one service' that this is a detail step after search_services.

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