Lexpad – Vocabulary Notebook & Flashcards

List words

list_words

Read-only

Browses the user's words by any mix of: a filter (all; due, waiting for review today; new or not_started, not yet practised; struggling, keeps going back to box 1; starred; mastered; retired, paused in the app; corrections; hard_spelling), a CEFR level, a topic, a date range (added_after, added_before), a text that narrows the list, and a sort (recent, oldest or alphabetical). notebook_id all covers every notebook. It lists matches in the chosen order, not ranked by how well they match. Each word comes with a short form of its meanings and its progress. Up to 100 words a page (default 50). The first page gives total, the number of matching words, counted up to 10000 (totalIsAtLeast marks a larger count). While more remain, a page ends with next_cursor; sent back as cursor with the same arguments, it returns the next page.

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_words"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`sort`	No	Order. Default recent (newest first).
`level`	No	Only this CEFR level.
`limit`	No	Words per page, 1 to 100. Default 50.
`query`	No	Only words matching this text, in either language.
`topic`	No	Only words filed under this topic (for an imported book, its title).
`cursor`	No	next_cursor from the previous page of the same call; omit for the first page.
`filter`	No	Which words. Default all.
`added_after`	No	Only words added on or after this date, YYYY-MM-DD.
`notebook_id`	No	A notebook id from list_notebooks, or all for every notebook. Omit for the default notebook.
`added_before`	No	Only words added before this date, YYYY-MM-DD.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`total`	No
`words`	Yes
`nextCursor`	No
`notebookId`	Yes
`totalIsAtLeast`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 21, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Goes well beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations by disclosing pagination mechanics (100 max, default 50), the fact that only the first page returns total, the 10000 counting cap with totalIsAtLeast, and the cursor round-trip requirement (same arguments). It omits any note on ordering guarantees across pages or performance limits, but the added behavioral context is substantial.

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?

Filter, sort, and pagination are front-loaded with no filler sentences. The single dense paragraph is heavier than it needs to be, and the parenthetical glosses inside the filter list make it hard to scan quickly.

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?

For a 10-optional-parameter lister with an output schema and read-only annotations, the description covers inputs, defaults, pagination, and what each item carries. The one real gap is sibling differentiation versus search_words and get_due_words, which an agent must resolve on its own.

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 earns more by glossing the filter values ('due, waiting for review today', 'struggling, keeps going back to box 1', 'retired, paused in the app') and clarifying that notebook_id 'all' covers every notebook. It also ties cursor to the 'same arguments' constraint, which the schema does not state.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource ('Browses the user's words') and immediately enumerates the filter axes, so the scope of the call is unmistakable. It does not name search_words or get_due_words, so the agent gets no explicit signal about which sibling is the right alternative for a given intent.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

'It lists matches in the chosen order, not ranked by how well they match' implicitly contrasts with a relevance-ranked search, which is a useful hint. But there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not statement and no named alternative, so the routing decision is left to inference.

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

All Lexpad – Vocabulary Notebook & Flashcards 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?