Marcora

list_plans

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists content plans for the user's active team as paginated summary rows; use get_plan for full detail. Read-only. Use it to find plans to act on and to dedupe before create_plan.

Results are visibility-scoped: team-visible plans plus the caller's own private plans (as creator or assignee). A teammate's private plans never appear, so an empty result does not mean the team has no plans.

Filters:

stage: array of Suggested, Accepted, In_Process (underscore form), Complete, Dismissed. Omit for all stages.
source: array of user_added, cora_proactive, cora_requested, workflow, playbook.
project_id (project UUID), category_id (integer).
assignee_scope: "me" (default) | "created_by_me" | "all_visible" (team-visible plus your own private ones).
sort: "due_asc_nulls_last" (default) | "created_desc".
page / per_page: default 20, max 100.

⚠️ Known limitations (accepted but not applied yet): due_before, due_after and search_text do not filter; for multi-value stage / source arrays only the FIRST element is honored, so pass single-value arrays.

Common uses:

Dedupe before create: filter by project_id; if a matching plan is Accepted or Suggested, offer to update it instead of creating a duplicate.
Workflow suggestions awaiting review: source=["workflow"] + stage=["Suggested"].
Plans I created: assignee_scope="created_by_me".

Present link_url exactly as returned.

Upcoming week view (once the date filters apply): due_before = (today + 7 days, YYYY-MM-DD), sort = "due_asc_nulls_last". due_before / due_after take ISO date strings (YYYY-MM-DD).

Links: copy link_url character for character. Never retype, shorten, or rebuild a link or the IDs inside it.

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_plans"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No	Page number (default 1).
`sort`	No	Sort order: "due_asc_nulls_last" (default — best for action planning) \| "created_desc" (newest first).
`stage`	No	Array of stage enum values. Use UNDERSCORE form In_Process. Allowed: Suggested, Accepted, In_Process, Complete, Dismissed. Omit for all stages. Note: only the first array element is honored currently — pass single-value arrays to be safe.
`source`	No	Array of source enum values: user_added, cora_proactive, cora_requested, workflow, playbook. Note: only the first array element is honored currently — pass single-value arrays to be safe.
`per_page`	No	Items per page (default 20, max 100).
`due_after`	No	ISO date YYYY-MM-DD. Returns plans with due_date >= due_after. Note: does not apply yet.
`due_before`	No	ISO date YYYY-MM-DD. Returns plans with due_date <= due_before. Note: does not apply yet.
`project_id`	No	Filter to plans associated with this project (project UUID string).
`category_id`	No	Filter to plans in this content category (integer ID). Omit (or pass 0/null) for NO category filter — all plans return, including uncategorized ones.
`search_text`	No	Substring match on plan title (case-insensitive). Note: does not apply yet.
`assignee_scope`	No	Whose plans to return. "me" (default — plans assigned to you) \| "created_by_me" (plans you created) \| "all_visible" (all plans visible to your team).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`items`	No	Array of plan summary objects. Each item: plan_uuid, link_url (shareable deep-link opening this plan's overlay), title, stage, source, assigned_to, created_by, due_date, produced_content_id, created_at, updated_at.
`curPage`	No
`nextPage`	No
`prevPage`	No
`itemsTotal`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 4, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, so the description is not obligated to restate safety. Instead it discloses a non-obvious access behavior that annotations cannot express: results are visibility-scoped to team-visible plans plus the caller's own private plans, and an empty result does not mean the team has no plans. It also flags accepted-but-inert parameters and the first-element-only array quirk, which changes how an agent should call the tool.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and the get_plan alternative, then cleanly sectioned into filters, limitations, uses, and link handling. It loses a point because the filter enumeration duplicates the schema one-for-one, which is redundant padding at 100% schema coverage, and the "Upcoming week view" paragraph describes behavior that does not work yet.

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 an 11-parameter list tool with an output schema, this covers everything an agent needs: what rows look like, what is excluded, which filters silently no-op, pagination bounds, and the instruction to pass link_url through unmodified. Return-value explanation is correctly delegated to the output schema rather than duplicated here.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents every one of the 11 parameters including enum values, defaults, and the "does not apply yet" caveats. The description's filter list largely restates that content verbatim; its marginal additions (recommended single-value arrays in practice, the intended upcoming-week pattern) are modest, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Lists content plans for the user's active team") plus the return shape ("paginated summary rows") and immediately distinguishes itself from the sibling get_plan for full detail. An agent can tell it apart from get_plan, list_content, and create_plan without opening any schema.

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?

Explicit when-to-use guidance with named alternatives: use get_plan for full detail, use this to find plans to act on and to dedupe before create_plan. The "Common uses" block converts that into concrete filter combinations (project_id dedupe check, source=workflow + stage=Suggested, assignee_scope=created_by_me), which removes nearly all inference.

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

All Marcora tools Inspect

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

Need Help?