Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
onec-odata-mcp

onec-odata-mcp

by pyrfor
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

odata_explain_entity

Explains an OData entity by detailing its fields, types, keys, and navigation properties from the metadata.

Instructions

Describe entity fields, types, keys and navigation properties from metadata

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": {
      "entity": "<entity>"
    },
    "name": "odata_explain_entity"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
entityYesEntity name (e.g. Catalog_Контрагенты)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, and the description lacks any disclosure of side effects, authentication needs, or safety profile (e.g., read-only nature is implied but not stated). The tool's behavioral impact is opaque.

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?

The description is a single concise sentence of 10 words, front-loading the purpose. It avoids redundancy but could benefit from a slightly more detailed structure.

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 parameter and no output schema, the description covers core functionality. However, it omits important context like expected return format (e.g., text or structured data) and whether the description is generated from OData metadata.

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% with a meaningful description for the single parameter. The tool description adds no extra semantic value beyond what the schema provides, but the schema itself is adequate.

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 uses a specific verb ('describe') and resource ('entity fields, types, keys and navigation properties from metadata'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like odata_query (data retrieval) and odata_list_entities (listing entities).

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., odata_metadata or odata_query). It does not mention prerequisites or contexts where it is appropriate.

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