Skip to main content
Glama

list_chats

Read-onlyIdempotent

Discover the tenant's chats and their ids. Each entry returns bubble_id — the chat's id, which send_message, list_chat_members, wait and the other chat tools take as chat. Page with limit (default 50) and pass next_cursor as cursor to continue; use query to filter by chat name or id. To see who is in one chat, use list_chat_members.

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_chats"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMost chats to return. Defaults to 50.
queryNoFilter by chat name or id.
cursorNoOpaque next_cursor returned by the previous list_chats page.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the bar is lower; the description adds real value by disclosing pagination behavior (default page size, cursor round-trip) and field naming. It stops short of describing ordering, total counts, or what a chat entry contains beyond the id.

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?

Three tight sentences with zero waste: what it returns, how to page/filter, and where to go for members. The most decision-relevant fact (bubble_id = chat id) is front-loaded.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by explaining the entry shape (bubble_id) and the next_cursor return. Minor gaps remain: no mention of ordering or behavior on an empty/no-match query, but nothing essential to correct invocation is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining that `next_cursor` is passed back as `cursor` and that `query` matches name or id. Adds the cross-tool semantic that the returned bubble_id is consumed as `chat` elsewhere.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Discover the tenant's chats and their ids') and immediately clarifies the key identity field mapping (bubble_id is the chat id that other tools take as `chat`). This distinguishes it from list_chat_members and the other chat tools explicitly.

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?

Gives concrete operational guidance: page with `limit` (default 50), pass `next_cursor` as `cursor`, filter with `query`, and redirects to `list_chat_members` for membership questions. Both when-to-use and the correct alternative are named.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.