Retrieve a check
lob_checks_getRetrieve a check by its unique ID to view its details and status.
Instructions
Retrieve a single check by ID.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Check ID (`chk_…`). |
lob_checks_getRetrieve a check by its unique ID to view its details and status.
Retrieve a single check by ID.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Check ID (`chk_…`). |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds no behavioral context beyond what annotations declare, so it doesn't add value.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, concise sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the key information.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The tool has no output schema, so the description should hint at what is returned. It does not mention the return type or structure, leaving the agent potentially unclear about the output.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, providing a baseline of 3. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema's parameter description (Check ID (`chk_…`)).
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the verb 'Retrieve' and the resource 'a single check by ID', which distinguishes it from siblings like lob_checks_list (list) and lob_checks_create (create).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Usage is implied by the description: use this when you have a specific check ID and need its details. No explicit when-not or alternatives are given, but the sibling names provide context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/optimize-overseas/lob-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server