MisakaNet

misakanet_get_lesson

Read-onlyIdempotent

[RETRIEVAL / READ] Fetch one public MisakaNet lesson by repository path or lesson ID. Use after misakanet_search returns a promising result to pull the full fix content. Provide exactly one of id or path (path takes precedence if both are supplied); if neither is supplied the tool returns {error}. Returns: object {path: string, content: string} — lesson markdown body (≤5000 chars); or {error: string}. Example: misakanet_get_lesson(id='auto-merge-ci-pipeline')

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	No	Lesson ID, usually the filename without .md, e.g. auto-merge-ci-pipeline. Either id or path is required.
`path`	No	Lesson path relative to the repository, e.g. lessons/core/auto-merge-ci-pipeline.md. Either path or id is required.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`path`	No
`error`	No
`content`	No

Schema Changelog

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

Changed4 schema fields changedSep 3, 2026

addedInput schema / minProperties
```
Added value: +1
```

changedInput schema / properties / id / description

Previous value: -"Lesson ID, usually the filename without .md, e.g. auto-merge-ci-pipeline."New value: +"Lesson ID, usually the filename without .md, e.g. auto-merge-ci-pipeline. Either id or path is required."

changedInput schema / properties / path / description

Previous value: -"Lesson path relative to the repository, e.g. lessons/core/auto-merge-ci-pipeline.md."New value: +"Lesson path relative to the repository, e.g. lessons/core/auto-merge-ci-pipeline.md. Either path or id is required."

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "content": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "error": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "path": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedAug 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond that: the error case when neither parameter is supplied, the precedence rule, the return shape, and the 5000-character limit.

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 compact and well-structured: a clear retrieval marker, the operation, workflow placement, key constraints, return type, and an example. Every sentence earns its place and the most important decision rules are front-loaded.

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 simple two-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and supporting annotations, the description is complete. It covers how to invoke it, what happens in edge cases, the return shape, and the expected workflow context, so an agent has everything needed to call 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. The description adds extra meaning by clarifying path precedence, the 'exactly one' requirement, and the error result if neither is provided, which goes beyond the schema's per-parameter descriptions.

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 'Fetch' plus a clear resource ('one public MisakaNet lesson') and identifies the distinguishing lookup keys (repository path or lesson ID). It explicitly frames itself as the retrieval step after misakanet_search, so an agent can tell it apart from search and write_lesson without opening schemas.

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?

It explicitly says to use this tool after misakanet_search returns a promising result, providing concrete workflow guidance. It also states the key invocation constraint: provide exactly one of id or path, with path taking precedence when both are supplied.

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

All MisakaNet tools Inspect

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

A4.6/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a distinct role: retrieval (search/get_lesson), submission (submit_intake/write_lesson), evidence (me_events), risk preflight, and registration. The two submission tools are carefully differentiated by structure and auth requirements, so an agent should not confuse them.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tools share the misakanet_ prefix and snake_case style, and most use a verb_noun pattern. Minor deviations like search, register, preflight, and me_events break the pattern slightly, but the names remain readable and predictable.

Tool Count5/5

Seven tools is well-scoped for a failure-lesson registry: one onboarding tool, one guardrail, two read paths, two submission paths, and one evidence-check tool. No tool feels redundant or missing at a coarse level.

Completeness5/5

The lifecycle is covered end-to-end: register for access, search and get lessons, submit either partial intakes or structured lessons, preflight risky actions, and check reuse evidence. Update/delete are intentionally absent because lessons are immutable, and corrections route through intake, so there are no dead ends.

Resources

Need Help?