Robert Blust

list_checks

Read-only

The checks the model's own gate runs, from the checker release this server was built with. Use to see which rules a script enforces and which are left to a reader. No input. Returns checks, each with name, rule, title and what it reports, a failure or a note that fails nothing, and ranBy. This server runs none of them.

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_checks"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`model`	Yes
`ranBy`	Yes
`checks`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 5, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / checks / items / properties / reports

Added value: +{
+  "enum": [
+    "failure",
+    "note"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedOutput schema / properties / checks / items / required

Previous value: -[
-  "name",
-  "rule",
-  "title"
-]New value: +[
+  "name",
+  "rule",
+  "title",
+  "reports"
+]

Changed4 schema fields changedSep 21, 2026

changedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Previous value: -{}New value: +false
```

addedOutput schema / properties / checks

Added value: +{
+  "items": {
+    "additionalProperties": {},
+    "properties": {
+      "name": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "rule": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "title": {
+        "type": [
+          "string",
+          "null"
+        ]
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "name",
+      "rule",
+      "title"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / ranBy
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```

changedOutput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "model"
-]New value: +[
+  "checks",
+  "ranBy",
+  "model"
+]

AddedSep 20, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the bar is lower; the description adds meaningful context beyond that by stating 'This server runs none of them', removing any impression that listing the checks executes them. It also discloses the return shape, including the failure/note distinction, which annotations do not cover.

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?

Purpose and the no-execution caveat come first, with return details last. It is slightly verbose enumerating the returned fields (`name`, `rule`, `title`, `reports`, `ranBy`) when an output schema exists, but nothing is wasted or buried.

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?

With an output schema present, the description needn't detail returns, and its field enumeration is redundant but harmless. It covers what the tool is, that it takes no input, and that nothing is executed — enough for an agent to call it correctly; the main gap is the absence of explicit sibling routing.

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?

Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description still explicitly says 'No input', confirming the empty schema rather than leaving an agent to infer it.

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 names a specific resource (the checks) and its provenance (the checker release the server was built with), and clarifies the checks belong to the model's gate rather than this server. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like list_rules and list_types, though the phrase 'the model's own gate' is somewhat opaque without prior context.

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?

'Use to see which rules a script enforces and which are left to a reader' gives a concrete scenario, but it never names an alternative (e.g. describe_rule or list_rules) or states when a different listing tool is the right choice. Usage is implied rather than routed.

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

All Robert Blust 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?