Skip to main content
Glama

Batch Resolve Libraries

gt_batch_resolve
Read-onlyIdempotent

Resolve up to 20 library names to their IDs and documentation URLs in a single batch call. Returns results for each library, enabling efficient preparation for fetching docs.

Instructions

Resolve multiple library names to IDs and docs URLs in a single call. Returns results for each library. Max 20 per call.

Use this when you already have a list of library names and need to batch-resolve them to IDs efficiently (e.g. before calling gt_get_docs for each). Registry-only lookup — no external npm/PyPI/crates fallback. For a single library with external fallback, use gt_resolve_library instead. For scanning a project's actual dependency files and fetching best practices, use gt_auto_scan instead.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
libraryNamesYesArray of library names to resolve (max 20). Example: ['react', 'next', 'tailwind']
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, etc. Description adds max 20 per call and registry-only no external fallback, which are useful constraints beyond annotations.

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?

Two sentences plus a paragraph. Front-loaded with purpose and constraints. Every sentence is informative with no fluff.

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?

No output schema. Description minimally says 'returns results for each library' without detailing format. Given the tool's batch nature, more specificity on output structure would be helpful.

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?

Only one parameter with 100% schema coverage including description and constraints. Description does not add additional meaning for the parameter beyond what schema provides.

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?

Clearly states it resolves multiple library names to IDs and docs URLs. Distinguishes from sibling tools: mentions gt_resolve_library (single with fallback) and gt_auto_scan (project scanning).

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly advises when to use (batch resolving names before get_docs) and when not to (single library with fallback, scanning project files). Names alternative tools.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/rm-rf-prod/ws-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server