Conecto

List tags, types, fields and correspondents

files_definitions

Read-onlyIdempotent

Everything the account defined to file things, each with how many files use it: tags, document types, custom fields (with their type), correspondents (with their CRM links), and how scans are read (auto-OCR, languages). Free.

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": "files_definitions"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, and the description adds useful content details: usage counts, custom field types, CRM links, and OCR language settings. It also notes the tool is free, but does not mention pagination, sorting, or completeness guarantees.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded and compact: one sentence that enumerates the returned categories without filler. Every clause adds a distinct piece of useful scope information.

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 zero-parameter, read-only listing tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently enumerates what will be returned. It could be stronger by stating whether results are paginated or how the returned structure is organized, but the core content is clear.

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?

This tool takes zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The schema coverage is 100% and the description appropriately focuses on the returned definitions rather than parameter usage.

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 exact resource set: filing definitions including tags, document types, custom fields, correspondents, and OCR/scan settings. It also distinguishes this from file-operating siblings by focusing on account-defined metadata rather than files themselves.

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?

The context implies this is the discovery tool for file metadata, but the description does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives such as files_list, files_define, or files_ocr_settings. Usage is inferable but not guided.

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

All Conecto 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?