get_sessionRead the current tempo and compact track patterns from an existing Keyboardia session.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| session_id | Yes | The UUID after /s/ in a Keyboardia share URL. Pass only the UUID, not the full URL. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful context by specifying that it reads 'current tempo and compact track patterns' and constrains to an 'existing' session, which gives expectations beyond the annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single concise sentence with no redundant words. It front-loads the action ('Read') and clearly states the resource and the data involved.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the simple one-parameter nature and presence of annotations, the description adequately conveys the core purpose and the type of returned content. However, since there is no output schema, the description could have more explicitly stated what the response includes, but it does enough for a basic getter.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema already fully documents the single session_id parameter with its UUID format and the instruction to pass only the UUID. The description provides no additional parameter detail, so it relies entirely on the schema's already strong coverage.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses the specific verb 'Read' and identifies the resource as an 'existing Keyboardia session,' then names the exact data returned ('current tempo and compact track patterns'). This clearly distinguishes it from write-oriented siblings like edit_session or create_session.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies the tool is for reading existing sessions by saying 'existing,' but it does not explicitly contrast with siblings such as analyze_session or state when to prefer this tool. There is no 'when not to use' guidance, so usage context is only implied.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct action: analyze, create, edit, export, get, publish, and remix. Even similar actions like create versus publish are clearly separated by whether the result is editable or immutable.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with clear, domain-appropriate verbs (analyze, create, edit, export, get, publish, remix). The naming is uniform and predictable.
Seven tools is well-scoped for the session lifecycle: create, read, edit, export, publish, remix, and analyze. There are no redundant tools and the count feels appropriate for the domain.
The tool set covers the core session lifecycle well, including editing, publishing, remixing, and exporting. A minor gap is the lack of a delete or list operation, but these may be handled outside the server or are not essential for the intended workflow.