Skip to main content
Glama

list-changes

List recorded changes. With no cursor returns the 10 newest; with since returns changes after that cursor, oldest first, for polling. Read-only.

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-changes"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo1-50, default 10
sinceNocursor from a previous response; returns only newer changes
beforeNoolder_cursor, to page back through history
watch_idNolimit to one watch

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully declares 'Read-only' and discloses ordering and default page size, but says nothing about rate limits, cursor expiry, or what a change record contains, leaving notable behavioral gaps for an unannotated tool.

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 short clauses, front-loaded with the resource, then the mode behaviors, then the safety property. Zero filler and every sentence carries 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 four-optional-parameter read-only listing tool with no output schema, the description covers the core mode semantics and safety. The main omission is any hint about the shape of returned changes or cursors, which matters for a polling workflow.

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; the description earns above that by explaining the consequence of omitting 'since' (10 newest) versus supplying it (oldest first, for polling), which the schema alone does not convey. It leaves 'before' and 'watch_id' entirely to the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('List recorded changes') and the sibling set (watches management) makes the resource distinction unambiguous. It doesn't name a sibling directly, but no plausible confusion exists given the watch-focused siblings.

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?

It explains two operating modes tied to parameters (no cursor = 10 newest; with since = oldest-first polling), which is implicit usage guidance. It never says when to prefer this over watch tools or when to use before/watch_id, so guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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.

Resources