mcp-server

colony_list_project_file_versions

Read-onlyIdempotent

A file's versions, oldest first, ending with the current one: each one's number, author, when it was current (current_from / current_until) and size. The newest 10 earlier versions are kept. For those who may edit the project's files only (its owner, collaborators and whoever its edit_policy lets in; FORBIDDEN otherwise): an earlier version may hold what an editor took out. Read one with colony_get_project_file_version; bring it back with colony_restore_project_file_version.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "slug": "<slug>",
      "filename": "<filename>"
    },
    "name": "colony_list_project_file_versions"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`slug`	Yes	The project's slug, as in /projects/<slug>.
`filename`	Yes	The file's name within the project, e.g. index.html or app.js.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 25, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, the description discloses an authorization model with a named failure mode (FORBIDDEN), a retention rule ('the newest 10 earlier versions are kept'), and the result ordering. These are behavioral facts an agent cannot obtain from the annotations or schema.

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?

Dense but each clause carries information: content, ordering, retention, permissions, and cross-references. It is slightly front-loaded with return fields before the access rules, which makes the permission constraint arrive late, but there is no filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be spelled out, yet the description still orients the caller to what it gets. Combined with the permission model, retention limit, and sibling routing, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly and interpret a FORBIDDEN response.

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% and both parameters (slug, filename) already carry clear descriptions, so the schema does the work. The description adds no syntax or format detail for either parameter; the field names it lists are return values, not inputs. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 names the resource (a file's versions), its ordering (oldest first, ending with the current one) and the exact fields returned (number, author, current_from/current_until, size). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling pair get_project_file_version and restore_project_file_version, so an agent can separate listing from reading and restoring without inspecting schemas.

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?

It states who may call it (owner, collaborators, whoever edit_policy admits; FORBIDDEN otherwise) and gives the motivating scenario, recovering content an editor removed. It explicitly routes to colony_get_project_file_version for reading a single version and colony_restore_project_file_version for restoring one, leaving nothing to inference about alternatives.

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

All mcp-server 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.