Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
docmost-mcp

docmost-mcp

by punyamsingh
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Read a Docmost page

get_page

Retrieve a Docmost wiki page as Markdown with its ID, space, parent, and URL using a page ID, slug, or full browser URL.

Instructions

Returns a page as Markdown along with its id, space, parent and URL.

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": {
      "pageId": "<pageId>"
    },
    "name": "get_page"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageIdYesPage id, slug id, or the full page URL copied from the browser.

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?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the return payload (Markdown plus id, space, parent, URL), which matters since there is no output schema, but it stays silent on permissions, behavior when the page is missing, and any side effects.

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 tight sentence with the return content front-loaded and no filler. Every clause earns its place.

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 a fully documented schema, the description covers what is returned even though no output schema exists. It omits only edge-case behavior, which is a minor gap.

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%, and the schema already explains that pageId accepts an id, slug id, or full URL. The description adds nothing about the parameter, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb (returns/reads) and resource (a page) plus the return format (Markdown). The singular 'a page' implicitly distinguishes it from list_pages and search_pages, but it never names an alternative 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?

No when-to-use guidance and no alternatives named. It doesn't say to use this instead of search_pages when the id is already known, nor describe any prerequisites or failure conditions.

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