Skip to main content
Glama

list_compute_images

List OS images available for on-demand compute instances.

Requires: API key with read scope.

Returns: {"images": [{"id": "UBUNTU_24_04_64BIT", "name": "Ubuntu 24.04 LTS (x86_64)", "family": "linux", "flavour": "ubuntu"}, ...]}

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_compute_images"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses the authentication requirement ('API key with read scope') and the return format with an example JSON structure. This provides useful context beyond a bare list operation, though it omits potential rate limits or pagination behavior.

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 concise and front-loaded, with the primary purpose stated in the first sentence. The requirements and return example are each clearly labeled, and the JSON example is compact yet informative, earning its place.

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?

Despite having no output schema and no annotations, the description is complete for a simple list tool: it conveys the purpose, the authentication prerequisite, and the return structure with an example. There are no parameters or nested objects to document, and no further context appears necessary.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the description does not need to add parameter details. The baseline for no parameters is 4, and the description appropriately focuses on the output shape instead, which is helpful.

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 'List OS images available for on-demand compute instances', specifying both the verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like list_compute_types and list_compute_instances by focusing on OS images specifically.

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?

The description provides clear context for when to use the tool (to see available OS images for compute instances) and includes the prerequisite of an API key with read scope. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is sufficiently clear.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.