Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@vitrion/zentria-mcp

@vitrion/zentria-mcp

Official
by vitrionbv
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

get-tenant

Read-only

Fetch a tenant by its unique ID to access detailed tenant information from Zentria CRM.

Instructions

Fetch a tenant by id (GET /api/public/tenants/{id}).

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": "get-tenant"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesTenant id.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes that this is a safe read operation, so the description is not required to restate safety. It adds the HTTP method GET and endpoint path, which is mildly useful, but it does not disclose behaviors such as 404 responses, authentication needs, or what happens when the tenant does not exist.

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 sentence that immediately states the action, resource, and endpoint. It contains no filler or redundant information and is optimally front-loaded.

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?

For a simple one-parameter, read-only fetch operation, the description is largely complete. The lack of an output schema is somewhat compensated by the tool name and the description's clear endpoint, though return format and error behavior are not described.

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 description coverage is 100%: the id parameter has a clear description, type, and bounds. The tool description only repeats 'by id', which adds no new semantic detail beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Fetch a tenant by id' and includes the exact HTTP endpoint GET /api/public/tenants/{id}. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling list tools like list-tenants by indicating it retrieves a single tenant by identifier.

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?

The description gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that list-tenants should be used for multiple tenants, nor does it state any prerequisites or exclusions. Usage context is only implied by the phrase 'by id'.

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