Skip to main content
Glama

buddypress_get_message

Retrieve a specific message thread from a BuddyPress community site using its thread ID to access conversation details.

Instructions

Get a single message thread

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThread ID

Implementation Reference

  • Handler implementation for the buddypress_get_message tool. It retrieves a single message thread by ID using the shared buddypressRequest helper with the endpoint `/messages/${args.id}`.
    else if (name === 'buddypress_get_message') {
      result = await buddypressRequest(`/messages/${args.id}`);
    }
  • Tool definition including name, description, and input schema for buddypress_get_message. The schema requires a numeric 'id' parameter for the thread ID. This object is part of the tools array used for registration.
    {
      name: 'buddypress_get_message',
      description: 'Get a single message thread',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          id: { type: 'number', description: 'Thread ID', required: true },
        },
        required: ['id'],
      },
    },
  • src/index.ts:528-530 (registration)
    Registration of all tools via ListToolsRequestHandler, which returns the tools array containing the buddypress_get_message tool definition.
    server.setRequestHandler(ListToolsRequestSchema, async () => {
      return { tools };
    });
  • Shared helper function buddypressRequest used by all BuddyPress tools, including buddypress_get_message, to make authenticated HTTP requests to the BuddyPress REST API.
    async function buddypressRequest(
      endpoint: string,
      method: string = 'GET',
      body?: any
    ): Promise<any> {
      const url = `${BUDDYPRESS_URL}/wp-json/buddypress/v2${endpoint}`;
      const auth = Buffer.from(`${BUDDYPRESS_USERNAME}:${BUDDYPRESS_PASSWORD}`).toString('base64');
    
      const options: any = {
        method,
        headers: {
          'Authorization': `Basic ${auth}`,
          'Content-Type': 'application/json',
        },
      };
    
      if (body && method !== 'GET') {
        options.body = JSON.stringify(body);
      }
    
      const response = await fetch(url, options);
    
      if (!response.ok) {
        const errorText = await response.text();
        throw new Error(`BuddyPress API Error (${response.status}): ${errorText}`);
      }
    
      return await response.json();
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states the action without behavioral details. It doesn't disclose if this is a read-only operation, requires authentication, has rate limits, or what the return format includes (e.g., thread content, participants). This leaves significant gaps for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 description is a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded and appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity, making it easy to parse quickly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral traits (e.g., read-only nature, error handling) and output expectations, which are crucial for a tool that retrieves data. This makes it inadequate for full contextual understanding.

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?

The description adds no parameter semantics beyond the input schema, which has 100% coverage for the single parameter 'id' described as 'Thread ID'. Since schema coverage is high, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the description doesn't need to compensate but also doesn't add value.

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?

The description clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('a single message thread'), making the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'buddypress_list_messages' or 'buddypress_get_activity' beyond the resource type, missing explicit sibling distinction.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a thread ID), exclusions, or comparisons to siblings like 'buddypress_list_messages' for listing multiple threads.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/vapvarun/buddypress-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server