guide-registry

List the guide registry

list_guides

Read-only

List the bicycle.guide registry — every guide's home, status, access, standard, syndication and grounding, plus the distribution roll-up (including guides homed to a property with no rendering surface).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`home`	No	Filter by owning property, e.g. jobframe, peopleanalyst, penwright.
`limit`	No	Cap the rows returned. Default 100, max 500.
`access`	No	Filter by access: free \| gated.
`domain`	No	Filter by life-domain — the layer ABOVE the subject shelf: work \| life \| play. Derived from the guide's category via content/registry/shelves.json. `rollup.by_domain` lists them.
`fields`	No	Row shape. "compact" returns only slug/title/home/status/access/price_cents/has_artifact/category/domain/personas/canonical_url — no rollup, no registry_meta. "full" returns the entire decorated registry row plus the rollup and registry_meta, as before. Default over this server: "compact".
`series`	No	Filter by guide series — the operational grouping of guides made to be used together, e.g. competencies, penwright-writing, startup-journey, ladder:hr-business-partner.
`status`	No	Filter by status: on \| draft.
`persona`	No	Filter by the audience a guide serves, e.g. people-analytics-professional, aspiring-author, executive-performance-leader. A guide can serve several; this matches any of them.
`category`	No	Filter by subject shelf — the reader-facing topic axis, e.g. field, skills, analytics, writing, comp. Matches the primary category OR a cross-shelf tag.
`standard`	No	Filter by standard: bicycle \| life-stage \| problem-opportunity.
`guide_type`	No	Filter by guide CLASS: career (level-based job guides, their own program) \| capability \| book_profile. Combine with series=ladder:<role> to get one role's whole ladder.
`has_artifact`	No	Only guides that do (true) / do not (false) have a new-design artifact.
`home_unrouted`	No	Only guides whose home has NO rendering surface at all (the distribution gap).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`count`	Yes
`limit`	Yes
`fields`	Yes
`guides`	Yes
`rollup`	No
`filters`	Yes
`api_version`	Yes
`registry_meta`	No
`total_matching`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

First observedSep 8, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context by explicitly noting that the distribution roll-up includes guides homed to a property with no rendering surface. This goes beyond the schema and clarifies an inclusion edge case without contradicting annotations.

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 entire description is one information-dense sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core action and resource, then appends the important scope details and edge-case inclusion, making every word earn its place.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (13 optional filters), the 100% schema coverage, output schema, and annotations, the description sufficiently conveys what the tool returns and highlights the notable distribution roll-up behavior. It is complete enough for an agent to invoke correctly, though it could slightly improve by explicitly contrasting with sibling list tools.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Parameter descriptions in the schema already cover 100% of the 13 parameters with detailed examples and default values, so the description does not need to compensate. It adds no parameter-specific meaning, which is acceptable given the high schema coverage; baseline 3 applies.

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?

Description uses a specific verb and resource: 'List the bicycle.guide registry' and enumerates the exact scope of what is returned (home, status, access, standard, syndication, grounding, distribution roll-up). This clearly differentiates it from siblings like get_guide (a single guide) and list_capabilities/list_taxonomy (different registries).

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 description implies use when you need the full registry of guides rather than a single guide or another taxonomy, but it never explicitly states when to prefer this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. The context is inferable from the name and sibling list, but the description itself gives no direct routing guidance.

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

All guide-registry tools Inspect

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.

Resources

Need Help?