Skip to main content
Glama
rossumai

Rossum MCP Server

Official
by rossumai

rossum_get_hook

Retrieve a serverless function hook by its ID to access its source code and configuration details for analysis and integration purposes.

Instructions

Get a specific serverless function hook by its ID, including its source code.

Args: hook_id: The ID of the hook to retrieve

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
hook_idYes

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function for the 'rossum_get_hook' tool. It takes a hook_id parameter and delegates to the _get_hook_impl helper. The @mcp.tool() decorator registers it as an MCP tool. The docstring and type hints define the input schema.
    @mcp.tool()
    async def rossum_get_hook(hook_id: str) -> Dict[str, Any]:
        """Get a specific serverless function hook by its ID, including its source code.
        
        Args:
            hook_id: The ID of the hook to retrieve
        """
        return await _get_hook_impl(hook_id=hook_id)
  • Helper function that performs the actual API request to retrieve the specific hook by ID using the shared _rossum_request utility.
    async def _get_hook_impl(hook_id: str):
        """Get a specific hook by ID including source code"""
        return await _rossum_request("GET", f"/hooks/{hook_id}")
  • mcp_server.py:146-146 (registration)
    The @mcp.tool() decorator registers the rossum_get_hook function as an MCP tool.
    @mcp.tool()
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states this is a read operation ('Get'), which is clear, but doesn't mention any behavioral traits like authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or what happens if the hook ID doesn't exist. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding how it behaves.

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?

The description is perfectly concise and well-structured: a clear purpose statement followed by a brief 'Args' section that explains the single parameter. Every sentence earns its place with no wasted words, and the information is front-loaded for quick understanding.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (1 parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is reasonably complete for basic usage. It explains what the tool does and the parameter, but lacks details about behavioral aspects and doesn't describe the return value (e.g., what fields the hook object includes beyond source code). For a tool with no output schema, more information about the response would be beneficial.

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?

The description adds meaning beyond the input schema by explaining that 'hook_id' is 'The ID of the hook to retrieve', which clarifies the parameter's purpose. However, with 0% schema description coverage and only 1 parameter, the description compensates adequately but doesn't provide additional context like format examples or constraints. The baseline is appropriate given the simple parameter structure.

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?

The description clearly states the specific action ('Get a specific serverless function hook'), identifies the resource ('by its ID'), and distinguishes it from sibling tools by specifying it retrieves a single hook (vs. rossum_get_hooks which likely lists multiple). The inclusion of 'including its source code' adds valuable detail about what information is returned.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides clear context for when to use this tool ('by its ID'), implying it's for retrieving a known specific hook rather than listing all hooks. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or name alternatives like rossum_get_hooks for listing hooks, which would be helpful for full differentiation.

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/rossumai/rossum-mcp-server'

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