list_documentsDocument metadata in the household vault.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| domain | No | ||
| status | No | ACTIVE | |
| category | No | ||
| household_id | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, and the description adds that the result is metadata scoped to the household vault, which is useful context. However, it does not disclose behavior such as default ACTIVE status filtering or limit handling.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is very short and contains no filler, making it easy to scan. However, it is a sentence fragment rather than a complete statement and sacrifices important usage and parameter context for brevity.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Although an output schema exists, the description is too sparse for a tool with five optional filtering parameters and no required fields. Key context such as default status filtering, household scoping, and the relationship to get_document is missing.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
With 0% schema description coverage and no parameter information in the description, the five parameters are left to inference from their names and defaults. The description must compensate for the low coverage but does not mention limit, domain, status, category, or household_id.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description identifies the resource as document metadata and scopes it to the household vault, making the listing intent reasonably clear despite lacking an explicit verb. It goes beyond the title by specifying metadata, which implicitly distinguishes it from get_document.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_document or list_households. The description does not state whether it is for metadata-only listing needs or what conditions should trigger this tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools are distinct, but several pairs overlap in purpose: get_market_data and list_watchlist both return watchlist prices/signals, and the four 'brief' tools have fuzzy boundaries. Descriptions help, but an agent could easily select the wrong one without deeper context.
The dominant verb_noun pattern (get_* for details, list_* for collections) is clear and consistent in style. There are minor deviations like lookup_index_by_brand and run_technical_analysis, and several plural collections use get_, but these remain readable and mostly predictable.
39 tools is well past the 25+ threshold and represents a heavy surface for an agent to navigate. The broad wealth domain explains some of the count, but many granular getters could be consolidated or curated.
The set covers the advertised wealth surface well—portfolio, risk, credit, real assets, markets, geopolitics, watchlist, goals, family, and documents—but it is read-only and lacks obvious navigation endpoints like list_portfolios or detail views for goals/alerts. Agents can retrieve most data, but not all lifecycle operations or entity enumerations are present.