Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
linkding-mcp

linkding-mcp

by si-essence
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

linkding_get_asset

Read-only

Fetch a specific bookmark asset using its bookmark ID and asset ID from Linkding, so AI assistants can access stored asset details.

Instructions

Get one bookmark asset. GET /api/bookmarks/<bookmark_id>/assets//.

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": {
      "bookmark_id": "<bookmark_id>",
      "asset_id": "<asset_id>"
    },
    "name": "linkding_get_asset"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
asset_idYesAsset id.
bookmark_idYesBookmark id.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

While annotations cover safety (readOnlyHint: true), the description adds crucial operational context by including the exact REST API endpoint ('GET /api/bookmarks/...'). This specific structural detail adds significant behavioral transparency beyond the structured hints.

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 definition is exceptionally concise, combining the action and the relevant URI structure into a single, highly efficient statement. It avoids unnecessary jargon or 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?

The definition is highly complete for an API-driven tool; the schema handles the data contract, and the description handles the functional definition and path. The only minor gap is not explicitly stating that the return value is metadata/JSON rather than the file content.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the input schema already provides robust semantic details for both parameters. The description reinforces the function rather than adding specific meaning beyond the structured data. Baseline score applies.

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 tool's purpose as 'Get one bookmark asset.' It accurately distinguishes this specific function from related actions like list or download assets, defining its role as fetching a specific asset within a bookmark.

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?

The description is clear about what the tool does, but it provides minimal guidance on when to use it relative to sibling tools like linkding_download_asset or linkding_get_bookmark. It is clear but lacks strong comparative usage guidelines.

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