list_projects
Read-only
List interactive projects and experiments on erikbethke.com. Returns names, descriptions, statuses, URLs.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Erik Bethke's Blog & Knowledge Graph
TDQS
A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotation readOnlyHint=true already flags this as a safe read operation. The description adds value by stating the return contents (names, descriptions, statuses, URLs), which is useful context for the agent. It does not mention pagination or ordering, but for a zero-parameter list endpoint, this is acceptable.
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 a single, focused sentence that begins with the verb 'List' and includes the resource and output fields. Every word contributes to understanding, with no fluff.
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?
Given the tool's simplicity (zero parameters, no output schema), the description is complete: it specifies the resource scope and return values. The readOnlyHint annotation covers safety. No additional context is needed for a basic list endpoint.
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?
The input schema is empty, so there are no parameters to document. Per the baseline for 0-param tools, the description's mention of returned fields is sufficient, and it adds no conflicting param information.
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 clearly identifies the tool's function: listing interactive projects and experiments on erikbethke.com, and specifies the output fields (names, descriptions, statuses, URLs). This distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on blog content, series, or site info.
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 does not explicitly discuss when to use this tool versus alternatives. However, the tool name and description imply it is the go-to for project listings, and the sibling tools cover different content types (blog posts, series), so usage is implied rather than stated.
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.
TDQS
A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool targets a distinct resource or action: single post retrieval, graph traversal, series navigation, site metadata, project listing, guestbook read/write, search, and quote verification. Even the related/series tools have explicit disambiguation in their descriptions.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern: get, list, read, search, sign, verify. No mixed conventions or vague verbs.
Tool Count5/5
With 9 tools, the set is well-scoped for a blog/knowledge-graph server. Each tool earns its place and there is no redundancy or bloat.
Completeness5/5
The surface covers the full read lifecycle (search, retrieve one, related, series), site context, projects, guestbook (read and write), and even a provenance-check tool. No obvious dead ends or missing core operations.