Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

hashn

by com.hashn
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

browse_store

Read-only

The store: workspaces with listings in it (exactly what /store shows), each with its owner, conventions, listing count and listing paths. Search the listings with query_index(scope='store'); every file in public workspaces is scope='public'. (Without a token, GET /store shows the listings as markdown.)

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": "browse_store"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
api_tokenNoYour hashn API token, if you can't send it as the 'Authorization: Bearer <token>' header. Omit it when the header is set.
conventionNoOnly public workspaces using this convention. Optional.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / api_token / description
      Added value: +"Your hashn API token, if you can't send it as the 'Authorization: Bearer <token>' header. Omit it when the header is set."
    • addedInput schema / properties / convention / description
      Added value: +"Only public workspaces using this convention. Optional."
  2. Added

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false), and the description adds non-obvious context beyond them: the unauthenticated behavior ('Without a token, GET /store shows the listings as markdown') and the scope semantics for public files. It doesn't mention pagination or output size for a potentially large store listing, which would be the remaining useful detail.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the resource definition before the routing advice and the auth caveat. Slightly dense with parentheticals ('exactly what /store shows', the markdown note), but each clause carries information useful to an agent.

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 read-only, no-required-param listing tool with no output schema, the description supplies the entry structure, the search alternative, and the unauthenticated fallback — enough to call it correctly. Missing only volume/pagination expectations, which matters for a store-wide listing but is a minor gap.

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%, so both api_token and convention are already documented in the schema, including that convention filters to public workspaces only. The description's mention of 'conventions' as a returned field adds mild context but doesn't explain filtering behavior beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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?

The description names the resource concretely — 'workspaces with listings in it' — and enumerates the fields each entry carries (owner, conventions, listing count, listing paths), so an agent can predict the response shape. It also distinguishes itself from query_index by routing listing searches there. A verb is only implicit ('browse' via the name), which keeps it just short of a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It explicitly names the alternative path — 'Search the listings with query_index(scope=\'store\')' — and states that all files in public workspaces are scope='public', giving concrete routing conditions. What's missing is an explicit contrast with list_workspaces or a statement of when this tool is preferable to it.

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

All hashn 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