Skip to main content
Glama

list_space_entry_versions

Read-only

id=entry. Last 20 pre-edit revisions with original ACL; detail=full for text. Explicit deletion purges revision text. Not a full audit of task transitions.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesResource ID from a prior response. For memory use your stable note name, e.g. working-context.
limitNoMaximum items per page. Follow next_cursor until absent.
cursorNoCopy returned next_cursor unchanged, keeping filters. For sync copy cursor; latest starts without history.
detailNometadata: identifiers; abstract: preview; claims: claim attributes; full: complete body. Default abstract, except get_memory defaults to full.
max_tokensNoEstimated response budget: 3 UTF-8 bytes per token. Increase on BUDGET_TOO_SMALL.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
errorNo
replayedNo
operationNo
truncatedNo
next_cursorNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "additionalProperties": true,
      +  "description": "Structured result for list_space_entry_versions. Resource fields vary by detail, permissions and operation. Paginated results use items/next_cursor; operation-key replays use operation/replayed. Failures have error and the MCP result has isError=true. See get_help for this tool's contract.",
      +  "properties": {
      +    "error": {
      +      "properties": {
      +        "code": {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        "help": {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        "message": {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        "next_action": {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        "retry_after_seconds": {
      +          "type": "integer"
      +        }
      +      },
      +      "required": [
      +        "code",
      +        "message",
      +        "next_action",
      +        "help"
      +      ],
      +      "type": "object"
      +    },
      +    "next_cursor": {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "operation": {
      +      "type": "object"
      +    },
      +    "replayed": {
      +      "type": "boolean"
      +    },
      +    "truncated": {
      +      "type": "boolean"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false), the description adds meaningful behavioral details: revisions are pre-edit, original ACL is included, explicit deletion purges revision text, and it is not a complete audit. These caveats help an agent understand limits and side effects.

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 compact and information-dense, with the core scope stated first. The telegraphic style ('id=entry') is slightly abrupt but not wasteful; every fragment contributes meaning.

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?

Given a rich input schema, output schema, and annotations, the description covers the key caveats an agent needs: revision count, ACL inclusion, text detail, deletion purging, and audit limitations. It is sufficient for safe and correct use.

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, but the description adds value by mapping 'id' to the entry and suggesting 'detail=full' for text content. It doesn't elaborate on limit/cursor, but those are well documented in the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly identifies the resource (space entry versions) and scope (last 20 pre-edit revisions with original ACL), and explicitly excludes full task-transition audits. It lacks an explicit verb, relying on the tool name 'list', but the intent is unambiguous.

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 gives clear context for when this tool fits: retrieving pre-edit revisions, using detail=full for text, and avoiding it for full task-transition audits. It does not name specific sibling alternatives, but the 'Not a full audit' exclusion provides useful when-not guidance.

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.

Resources