Skip to main content
Glama

Aevia

by ai.aeviamodeler
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List impact methods

engine_list_methods
Read-onlyIdempotent

List an engine database's LCIA methods, or one method's impact categories. The database is the one named by engine, else this connection's default. Without ref, lists the available methods, each with an m<N> ref. With ref (m<N>), returns that method's impact categories; include_factors=true adds the characterization factors per category, which is rarely needed. When listing, scope_ref (any engine ref such as p3/e1/m2) lists the methods of the database that ref came from instead.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
refNo`m<N>` from a recent `engine_list_methods()` listing. Omit to list available methods.
engineNoName of the engine database, as `lca_get(kind='engines')` lists it (case-insensitive). Omitted: this connection's default engine. Not combined with `scope_ref`, which picks the database a ref came from.
scope_refNoOptional (list only). An engine ref whose database's methods to list instead of the active connection's.
include_factorsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / engine
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Name of the engine database, as `lca_get(kind='engines')` lists it (case-insensitive). Omitted: this connection's default engine. Not combined with `scope_ref`, which picks the database a ref came from.",
+  "maxLength": 255,
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context beyond them: the default-engine fallback, that `engine` and `scope_ref` are mutually exclusive, and that include_factors materially expands the payload but is rarely needed.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core list action, then mode selection, then the scope_ref nuance. Dense but every sentence carries information; no filler. Slightly long sentences reduce it from a 5.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing returns, and it does: methods each with an `m<N>` ref, or a method's impact categories plus optional factors. It covers the key behaviors an agent needs; pagination or result-size limits are not addressed, which is a minor omission.

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 75%, and the description meaningfully augments it: it explains the `m<N>` ref format and its provenance, the default-engine behavior when `engine` is omitted, and the exclusivity of `engine` vs `scope_ref`. The one gap is `include_factors`, whose cost/verbosity implication is only gestured at with 'rarely needed.'

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'List an engine database's LCIA methods, or one method's impact categories.' It cleanly distinguishes the two operating modes and the resource scope, which separates it from siblings like engine_get or engine_search.

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?

It states the conditions that select each behavior: omit `ref` to list methods, pass `ref` (m<N>) to get categories, and use `scope_ref` to list another database's methods. It also flags `include_factors=true` as 'rarely needed,' steering default usage. No explicit when-not-to-use guidance, but the branching is clear.

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

All Aevia toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources