ProofSnap

List page monitoring schedules

list_schedules

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists the account's schedules that capture a page repeatedly (at an interval, on a cron, or when the page changes). With schedule_id, returns that schedule and its recent runs.

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_schedules"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`schedule_id`	No	One schedule, for example sch_...; omit for the list.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`runs`	No
`status`	No
`schedules`	No
`schedule_id`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 31, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world. The description adds the genuinely useful detail that schedule_id mode also returns recent runs, but says nothing about result caps, ordering, or how 'recent' is bounded.

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?

Two tight sentences: the first front-loads what is listed and the capture cadences, the second covers the single-key variant. No filler.

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?

With annotations covering safety and an output schema covering returns, the description says enough to invoke either mode correctly. It leaves only mild gaps about list size/ordering.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and already explains schedule_id including example format and omit-for-list behavior, so baseline 3 applies; the description adds little new syntax or constraints beyond noting the recent-runs payload.

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 (lists), resource (schedules), and the scope (page-capture schedules at interval/cron/on-change), plus the dual-mode behavior when schedule_id is supplied. It is clearly distinguishable from create_schedule and set_schedule_status.

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?

Implies when to use each mode via 'omit for the list' semantics and 'with schedule_id, returns that schedule', but never explicitly contrasts with a get schedule sibling or says when to prefer this over poll_capture/list_events. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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

All ProofSnap tools Inspect

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.