get_packageRegistration metadata for a package — versions, tags, dependencies, dates.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Package id (e.g. "Newtonsoft.Json") | |
| prerelease | No | Include prerelease pages (default false) |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| count | No | Total number of version pages | |
| items | No | Version catalog pages | |
| @context | No | JSON-LD context |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "id": "Newtonsoft.Json"
+ },
+ {
+ "id": "Serilog",
+ "prerelease": true
+ }
+]Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "description": "Package registration metadata with versions and dependencies",
+ "properties": {
+ "@context": {
+ "description": "JSON-LD context",
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "count": {
+ "description": "Total number of version pages",
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ "items": {
+ "description": "Version catalog pages",
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "@id": {
+ "description": "URL to version page",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "count": {
+ "description": "Number of versions in this page",
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ "items": {
+ "description": "Version entries",
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "@id": {
+ "description": "URL to version metadata",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "downloads": {
+ "description": "Version download count",
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ "listed": {
+ "description": "Whether version is listed",
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "version": {
+ "description": "Package version",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "lower": {
+ "description": "Lower bound version in this page",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "upper": {
+ "description": "Upper bound version in this page",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the description adds value by specifying the content of the metadata (versions, tags, dependencies, dates). No contradictions. The description enriches the behavioral profile 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 that front-loads the key purpose and enumerates the data categories. Every word is informative and no redundant phrases are present.
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 tool's simplicity (two parameters, output schema present, comprehensive annotations), the description is adequate. It covers the return type, though it could mention that the output is a JSON object, but the output schema handles that. It feels complete for the context.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100% as both id and prerelease parameters have clear schema descriptions. The tool description does not add additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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 clearly states 'Registration metadata for a package' and lists the specific types of information returned (versions, tags, dependencies, dates). This verb-resource combination distinguishes it from siblings like list_versions which likely return only versions.
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 usage for retrieving full package metadata, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_versions or latest_version. The purpose is clear enough for an agent to infer, but lacks explicit guidance.
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.
Several tools are near-identical: ask_pipeworx and ask_pipeworx_beta are explicitly the same function, ask_pipeworx_grounded is the same router with a different response mode, and polymarket_edges/polymarket_arbitrage/polymarket_edge_tracker/polymarket_fill_risk all overlap on prediction-market edge detection. search vs search_within vs discover_tools also blur discovery boundaries. An agent would struggle to pick the right tool without reading every long description.
All names are snake_case and individually readable, so there's no chaotic style mixing. However, the pattern is inconsistent: bare verbs (search, recall, forget, subscribe), verb_noun (get_package, resolve_entity, scan_dependency), noun phrases (latest_version, recent_alerts), and compound prefixes (pipeworx_*, polymarket_*). The server is named 'Nuget' but the vast majority of tools carry pipeworx_ or polymarket_ prefixes, making the namespace feel like a grab-bag.
35 tools is far too many for a server ostensibly named 'Nuget' — only ~5 tools relate to NuGet package lookup (search, get_package, list_versions, latest_version, scan_dependency), and even scan_dependency is npm-only. The remaining ~30 tools belong to an unrelated Pipeworx research/markets/memory platform. The count is inflated by redundant variants (ask_pipeworx trio, six polymarket tools) rather than distinct functionality.
Judged by the server's stated purpose (NuGet), the surface is thin and has dead ends: search and version metadata are covered, but there's no package owner/publisher info, no readme/description body fetch, no download stats beyond totals, and scan_dependency targets the wrong ecosystem (npm). Judged by the actual dominant domain (Pipeworx), coverage is excessive and sprawling. The tool set fails to deliver a coherent, complete surface for either apparent purpose.