Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Microsoft Graph MCP Server

Microsoft Graph MCP Server

by ry-ops
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

get_site

Retrieves details for a specific SharePoint site using its site ID, enabling targeted site lookup within Microsoft Graph administration workflows.

Instructions

Get details for a specific SharePoint site by ID

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": {
      "site_id": "<site_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_site"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
site_idYesThe site ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden; 'Get details' implies a safe read with no side effects, which is the main thing an agent needs. It says nothing about required permissions, behavior on a nonexistent or invalid site ID, or what 'details' includes.

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 resource and lookup key front-loaded. Nothing is repeated from the schema and there is no filler.

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 full schema coverage and no output schema, this is nearly sufficient as written. The only real gap is that 'details' is unspecified, so the agent cannot anticipate the returned fields or permission requirements.

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%, so the schema already documents site_id, making a 3 the baseline. The description adds only the small clarification that the identifier is an ID rather than a URL, which is marginal but relevant given the get_site_by_url sibling.

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 (Get) and resource (SharePoint site) plus the lookup key (by ID), which implicitly separates it from get_site_by_url and get_root_site. It never names those siblings, so the distinction is inferred rather than stated.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative, even though list_sites, get_site_by_url, and get_root_site compete for the same intent. The 'by ID' phrasing offers only implied routing guidance.

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