Skip to main content
Glama

UseMyContext.ai

by io.github.usemycontext

Fetch a document (deep research)

fetch
Read-only

Fetch one document's full extracted text by id (a file id from search / search_files / list_files), in the deep-research result shape. ALIAS: this is the SAME read as get_file (same data, same permissions, same audit, same size guard - large files are truncated) - use it when your client requires the id/title/text/url fetch contract (ChatGPT deep research); otherwise prefer get_file, which also serves download links and inline images. Read-only; audited.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe document id - a file id from search, search_files, or list_files.
handleNoOptional: name one of the user's OWN profiles by its public @handle (with or without the leading @), as listed by list_profiles - an alternative to projectId, and it takes precedence if both are given. Honored only for an account-wide connection; a single-project connection is already scoped and ignores it. A handle that is not one of the user's own profiles is refused outright, never quietly swapped for another profile. To read context someone ELSE shared with the user or published, use shared_context instead.
projectIdNoOptional: which of the user's projects holds the file. Honored only for an account-wide connection; a single-project connection is already scoped and ignores this.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe requested file id.
urlYesWhere the user manages this file (the usemycontext.ai Storage page).
textYesThe file's full extracted text (truncated at the same size guard as get_file).
titleYesThe file's name.
metadataNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / handle
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional: name one of the user's OWN profiles by its public @handle (with or without the leading @), as listed by list_profiles - an alternative to projectId, and it takes precedence if both are given. Honored only for an account-wide connection; a single-project connection is already scoped and ignores it. A handle that is not one of the user's own profiles is refused outright, never quietly swapped for another profile. To read context someone ELSE shared with the user or published, use shared_context instead.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already include readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context: it states the tool is read-only, audited, and that large files are truncated. It also notes that permissions and audit are the same as get_file, fully leveraging the annotations while adding critical details.

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?

The description is well-structured and front-loaded with the core purpose. It is slightly lengthy due to thorough comparisons and edge-case explanations, but every sentence adds value. A perfect 5 would be more succinct while retaining clarity.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (3 params, 100% schema coverage, output schema present, and annotations), the description is remarkably complete. It covers the tool's behavior, limitations (truncation), relationship to sibling, and usage context. No gaps remain.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful nuance beyond the schema: it explains the handle parameter's behavior (honored only for account-wide connections, precedence over projectId) and the conditionality of projectId. This extra context justifies a score of 4.

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 clearly states the tool fetches one document's full extracted text by id, specifically for the deep-research result shape. It distinguishes itself from the sibling get_file by noting it is the same read but with a different output contract, making the purpose unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. the alternative: use fetch when the client requires the id/title/text/url fetch contract (ChatGPT deep research); otherwise prefer get_file. It also notes the alias relationship, giving clear context for tool selection.

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

All UseMyContext.ai toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Most tools have clear boundaries, but fetch/get_file and search/search_files are explicit aliases of each other, creating redundant purposes. account vs info and list_files vs search_files also require careful reading to tell apart, though the descriptions do provide guidance.

Naming Consistency3/5

The set mixes verb_noun names (list_files, query_table, suggest_update) with standalone nouns (account, info, profile) and bare verbs (fetch, search). The naming is readable and lowercase throughout, but the conventions are not uniform.

Tool Count5/5

Thirteen tools is a reasonable, well-scoped number for a personal-context and document-access server. The two alias pairs add some redundancy but do not make the set feel bloated.

Completeness4/5

The server covers the core read-only workflows: discovering files, searching semantically, querying tabular data, retrieving full documents, reading profiles, and accessing shared context. Direct profile editing or file mutations are intentionally out of scope for this read-only connection, and suggest_update provides the one sanctioned write path.

Resources