Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Baasix MCP Server

Baasix MCP Server

by tspvivek
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

baasix_get_file_info

Retrieve detailed information about a specific file by providing its file ID, including metadata and storage details for backend file management.

Instructions

Get detailed information about a specific file

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": "baasix_get_file_info"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesFile ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.7

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the safety burden; 'Get' signals a read-only operation, which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not state what the returned 'detailed information' includes, whether authentication is required, or how missing/invalid IDs are handled.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The sentence is short and front-loaded with the action, and there is no filler or repetition. It loses one point because 'detailed information' remains vague, making the sentence concise but not information-dense.

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?

For a one-parameter read tool, the description plus 100% schema coverage is minimally sufficient to call it: provide a file ID and expect file information. But with no output schema and no annotation safety profile, the absence of return-value detail and ID provenance keeps it from being more complete.

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 only parameter id is already documented as 'File ID'. The description adds 'specific file' but no extra semantics, so it falls at the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 names a concrete verb ('Get') and resource ('detailed information about a specific file'), scoping the operation to a single file. This distinguishes it from siblings like baasix_list_files (listing) and baasix_delete_file (deletion).

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

It provides no guidance on when to call this tool instead of baasix_list_files or baasix_get_item, and no mention that the file ID likely comes from a prior list call. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name and surrounding tools.

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