Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Mainframe MCP Server

Mainframe MCP Server

by rohittrimale
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

get_job_jcl

Read-only

Retrieve the JCL used by a submitted or completed mainframe job to review or debug job execution.

Instructions

Retrieve the JCL used for a submitted/completed job.

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": {
      "job_name": "<job_name>",
      "job_id": "<job_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_job_jcl"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
job_idYes
job_nameYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. Description adds no new behavioral context (e.g., where JCL comes from, return format). Consistent but not additive.

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?

Single sentence, no fluff, directly states purpose. Efficiently structured.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Tool has output schema (unseen) but description omits return value details. Given sibling complexity, agent lacks information to distinguish use cases (e.g., when JCL is complete vs active). Needs more context.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0% and description does not explain the purpose of job_name and job_id beyond their titles. Given low coverage, description should compensate but fails to do so.

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?

Description clearly states retrieving JCL for a submitted/completed job. Siblings include get_jcl and other getters, but specifying 'submitted/completed' adds some distinction.

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 versus alternatives (e.g., get_jcl, get_job_file_content). Agent must infer from tool name alone.

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