ontology-atlas

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

get_concepts

Read-only

Fetch multiple ontology nodes by slugs or immutable UIDs; missing rows return partial errors without stopping the batch.

Instructions

Fetch multiple nodes by exactly one selector array: slugs (canonical slugs or unique aliases) or immutable uids. Same per-row shape as get_concept; successful rows always return permanent uid plus current canonical slug. Order matches the selected input array. Missing or invalid slug rows return partial {slug, ok:false, error, ...repairFields} rows, so later valid slugs still resolve; UID misses likewise return {uid, ok:false, error, ...repairFields} without aborting the batch. Graph relations and graph-operation inputs remain slug-based.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`body`	No	Applies to every row. `excerpt` (default) returns the first prose paragraph per row; `full` returns the entire markdown body per row and caps the batch at 20 slugs.
`uids`	No	Exact permanent node UIDs. Use instead of `slugs`, never together with it. Max 50 (max 20 with body `full`).
`slugs`	No	Vault-relative slugs, unique tail slugs, or frontmatter `slug` aliases (e.g. ["capabilities/x", "elements/y"]). Omit the .md extension. Max 50 per call (max 20 when body is `full`).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`concepts`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.4.0Oct 1, 2026

changedOutput schema / properties / concepts / items / properties / warnings / items / properties / code / enum

Previous value: -[
-  "unclosed-frontmatter",
-  "parse-zero-keys",
-  "malformed-frontmatter-line",
-  "malformed-quoted-scalar",
-  "missing-kind",
-  "empty-kind",
-  "unknown-kind",
-  "missing-uid",
-  "invalid-uid",
-  "invalid-merged-uids",
-  "non-canonical-merged-uids",
-  "missing-expected-field",
-  "non-canonical-graph-array",
-  "dangling-graph-reference",
-  "duplicate-slug",
-  "duplicate-uid",
-  "definition-missing",
-  "boundary-missing",
-  "epistemic-exclusion",
-  "uncertainty-missing",
-  "slug-outside-kind-folder",
-  "folder-only-evidence",
-  "dependency-unwitnessed",
-  "starter-example-node"
-]New value: +[
+  "unclosed-frontmatter",
+  "parse-zero-keys",
+  "malformed-frontmatter-line",
+  "malformed-quoted-scalar",
+  "missing-kind",
+  "empty-kind",
+  "unknown-kind",
+  "missing-uid",
+  "invalid-uid",
+  "invalid-merged-uids",
+  "non-canonical-merged-uids",
+  "missing-expected-field",
+  "non-canonical-graph-array",
+  "dangling-graph-reference",
+  "duplicate-slug",
+  "duplicate-uid",
+  "definition-missing",
+  "boundary-missing",
+  "epistemic-exclusion",
+  "uncertainty-missing",
+  "slug-outside-kind-folder",
+  "folder-only-evidence",
+  "dependency-unwitnessed",
+  "dependency-unjudged",
+  "starter-example-node",
+  "kind-under-sources"
+]

Changed1 schema field changedv1.3.0Sep 23, 2026

changedOutput schema / properties / concepts / items / properties / warnings / items / properties / code / enum

Previous value: -[
-  "unclosed-frontmatter",
-  "parse-zero-keys",
-  "malformed-frontmatter-line",
-  "malformed-quoted-scalar",
-  "missing-kind",
-  "empty-kind",
-  "unknown-kind",
-  "missing-uid",
-  "invalid-uid",
-  "invalid-merged-uids",
-  "non-canonical-merged-uids",
-  "missing-expected-field",
-  "non-canonical-graph-array",
-  "dangling-graph-reference",
-  "duplicate-slug",
-  "duplicate-uid"
-]New value: +[
+  "unclosed-frontmatter",
+  "parse-zero-keys",
+  "malformed-frontmatter-line",
+  "malformed-quoted-scalar",
+  "missing-kind",
+  "empty-kind",
+  "unknown-kind",
+  "missing-uid",
+  "invalid-uid",
+  "invalid-merged-uids",
+  "non-canonical-merged-uids",
+  "missing-expected-field",
+  "non-canonical-graph-array",
+  "dangling-graph-reference",
+  "duplicate-slug",
+  "duplicate-uid",
+  "definition-missing",
+  "boundary-missing",
+  "epistemic-exclusion",
+  "uncertainty-missing",
+  "slug-outside-kind-folder",
+  "folder-only-evidence",
+  "dependency-unwitnessed",
+  "starter-example-node"
+]

Changed2 schema fields changedv1.2.5Sep 15, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / concepts / items / properties / isNode
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```

addedOutput schema / properties / concepts / items / properties / review

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "agentGuidance": {
+      "minLength": 1,
+      "pattern": "^(?!\\s)(?!.*\\s$)(?!.*\\u0000).+$",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "currentness": {
+      "enum": [
+        "not-confirmed",
+        "unknown",
+        "current",
+        "changed-since-review"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "note": {},
+    "reviewedAt": {},
+    "reviewedBy": {},
+    "state": {}
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "state",
+    "currentness"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv0.13.0Sep 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations cover safety (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint=false), and the description goes well beyond them: partial-failure semantics for missing/invalid slugs and UIDs, ordering guarantees, permanent uid + canonical slug on success, and the batch cap implications. This is exactly the extra behavioral context that annotations cannot supply.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and selector rule, then failure semantics. Dense but every sentence carries information; the run-on clauses about partial rows are slightly heavy but justified by the batch failure model.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a 3-param batch read tool with a full output schema, the description covers selection rules, ordering, per-row success/failure shape, and batching limits. An agent needs nothing more to invoke it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds the cross-parameter constraint ('exactly one selector array') and links body=full to a reduced batch cap. That said, it does not fully document the repairFields shape beyond naming it.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Fetch multiple nodes') and names the exact selector mechanism (slugs or uids). The plural form is implicitly contrasted with the sibling get_concept (singular), so an agent can distinguish batch from single fetch.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Clearly states the constraint that exactly one selector array must be used and that slugs and uids are mutually exclusive ('Use instead of slugs, never together'). It does not explicitly route to alternatives like query_concepts or find_neighbors, but the usage conditions are unambiguous.

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