Skip to main content
Glama

busabase

by com.busabase
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List Skill, Drive, or AirApp nodes

node_list_files_trees
Read-only

List Skill, Drive, or AirApp nodes

Returns a lightweight summary row for every node of the given kind — id, name, slug, type, and metadata, but NOT the node's file list. Follow up with node_get_file_tree for one node's files, or node_files_list for just the file inventory. For the workspace tree across all node types, use nodes_list instead.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindYesWhich file-tree node kind to act on.
playbookNoOptional. The playbook you are following, as `kind:nodeId[:key]` from playbooks_search (e.g. `prompt:nod_123:log-visit`). Recorded on the change request so the person can see which playbook produced it.
targetSpaceIdNoBusabase space id. Call auth_verify first and ask the user which space to use when more than one is returned.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / playbook
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional. The playbook you are following, as `kind:nodeId[:key]` from playbooks_search (e.g. `prompt:nod_123:log-visit`). Recorded on the change request so the person can see which playbook produced it.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool read-only and non-destructive. The description adds useful behavior: it returns only summary metadata, excludes file content, and can be used as a lightweight precursor to more detailed tools. It does not mention pagination or rate limits, but those are less critical for a read-only listing endpoint with annotations covering safety.

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?

Four sentences, each adds value: identity, returned fields, exclusions, and routing to alternatives. No redundant phrases; the structure front-loads the core action.

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?

The description fully covers what the tool returns, what it omits, and the related tools for deeper exploration. With no output schema, it appropriately explains the response shape and required context (kind, space ID via schema). There are no missing instructions that would prevent an agent from invoking it.

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?

Since schema_description_coverage is 100%, the baseline is 3. The description's mention of 'of the given kind' reinforces the kind parameter but adds no new details beyond the schema's own documentation for playbook and targetSpaceId.

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 opens with a specific action ('List ... nodes') and immediately scopes it by kind. It clarifies what the tool does not return (file lists) and names sibling tools that do that, so an agent can distinguish it from node_get_file_tree, node_files_list, and nodes_list.

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?

Explicitly instructs when to follow up with node_get_file_tree or node_files_list, and when to use nodes_list instead. This leaves no ambiguity about which sibling to call for a given need.

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

All busabase toolsInspect
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