get-resource-referenceRetrieve a resource reference for MCP clients by specifying the resource type (Text or Blob) and resource ID. Clients use this reference to access the resource.
Returns a resource reference that can be used by MCP clients
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| resourceType | No | Text | |
| resourceId | No | ID of the text resource to fetch |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states the return type (resource reference) without mentioning side effects, authorization, or response format.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single efficient sentence. However, brevity comes at the cost of completeness; it could be expanded without losing conciseness.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description fails to explain what a 'resource reference' is or how the response should be used. It lacks sufficient context for an AI agent to invoke correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 50% (only resourceId has a description). The tool description adds no additional meaning to either parameter, leaving the resourceType enum undocumented.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description 'Returns a resource reference that can be used by MCP clients' states the basic action but does not differentiate from sibling tools like get-resource-links or get-structured-content. It is not a tautology but lacks specificity.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any prerequisites, constraints, or use case.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.