instabox-mcp

Get a snapshot

instabox_get_snapshot

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a snapshot by ID to verify its status (ready, pending, or failed) before using it.

Instructions

Get one snapshot by ID. status is ready (usable), pending (a live snapshot still uploading) or failed (see error).

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "instabox_get_snapshot"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Snapshot ID (sn_..., or im_... for older ones)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 1, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description earns credit by documenting the returned `status` values (ready/pending/failed) and pointing at `error` for failures — genuinely useful context an agent cannot get from the structured fields. It does not say what happens when an unknown ID is passed.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action, and the second sentence uses its space to enumerate status semantics. Nothing repeats the schema or annotations.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully covers the key return discriminator (`status`) and the failure indicator (`error`). It omits what else a snapshot record contains and the not-found behavior, but an agent can call this correctly with what is given.

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% and the sole `id` parameter is fully documented, including the sn_/im_ prefix formats. The description adds nothing about the parameter — its detail is about return values — so the baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource ("Get one snapshot by ID") and the singular-by-ID framing implicitly distinguishes it from instabox_list_snapshots. It stops short of explicitly naming the list sibling, so the differentiation is inferable 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?

Usage is implied by "by ID" — you call this when you already hold a snapshot identifier — but there is no explicit when-to-use vs instabox_list_snapshots or instabox_list_snapshot_files, and no prerequisites mentioned. Adequate framing, no alternatives or exclusions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.