Skip to main content
Glama

asksteps

by co.asksteps

asksteps: list the available designs

asksteps_list_themes
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists the ready-made designs a form or funnel can use, with the id you put into themeId. Call it before you set a design — an id you invent is rejected, not silently replaced. It also answers plain questions like whether there is a dark design, without needing an account.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
noteYesOne sentence for the user.
statusYesOutcome. One of: "ok", "unavailable" (this deployment has no design catalogue).
themesNoThe designs, in the order the product lists them. The first is the default.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds useful behavioral details beyond those: invented ids are rejected rather than silently replaced, and no account is needed for basic queries. This gives the agent important expectations about validation and authentication.

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 compact, well-structured, and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds distinct value: what it lists, why to call it early, and an additional no-account use case. No filler or repetition.

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?

For a zero-parameter listing tool with an output schema and read-only/idempotent annotations, the description covers purpose, timing, error behavior, and access requirements. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to invoke and interpret this tool correctly.

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 has zero parameters and full schema coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description adds extra meaning by explaining that the returned design id is what goes into themeId, which helps the agent use the output correctly in downstream calls.

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 uses a specific verb ('Lists') and clear resource ('ready-made designs a form or funnel can use'), and connects the output to the themeId field. It clearly differentiates this from sibling tools like list_forms or list_templates by focusing on theme/design options.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description explicitly instructs when to call it ('Call it before you set a design') and warns about invalid ids being rejected. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the guidance is clear and actionable for an agent.

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

All asksteps toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Tools are mostly distinct with clear ownership of each resource and action, and descriptions explicitly contrast sibling pairs (analyze_pdf vs import_pdf, create_form vs create_funnel, publish_form vs update_publication, change_plan vs start_checkout). However, an agent skimming names alone could misselect between the four creation tools or the two PDF tools without reading the descriptions carefully.

Naming Consistency5/5

Every tool follows the asksteps_<verb>_<noun> pattern perfectly, with uniform verbs like get_, list_, create_, and update_. The only slight deviation is create_from_template, but even that stays predictable and readable within the convention.

Tool Count3/5

At 24 tools, this sits at the heavy end of the 16-25 borderline range. The broad domain (form/funnel building, publishing, PDF import, billing, stats, leads) justifies most of them and there is no obvious redundancy, but the sheer volume makes navigation harder than a tighter set.

Completeness4/5

The core form and funnel lifecycle is well covered: multiple creation paths, read, full replacement update, delete with confirmation, publish/unpublish, stats, and leads export. Billing covers first purchase, plan changes, and quota checks. Minor gaps exist — no dedicated subdomain listing tool, no funnel-specific stats, and no programmatic PDF field mapping — but these are explicitly documented as human steps, so agents can work around them.

Resources