Skip to main content
Glama

Immersive Commons

by com.immersivecommons

List print requests (member; managers see the farm queue)

ic_prints_list
Read-only

List YOUR print requests, newest first. Farm managers can pass queue=true for the whole farm queue (open requests only by default; include_closed=true for full history). Args: { queue?, include_closed?, limit? }. Returns: { ok, count, requests }. Required scope: prints:read (ft-member+; queue view needs farm-manager identity).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax results (default 20 for your list, 100 cap for the queue).
queueNoFarm managers only: list the whole farm queue instead of your own requests.
include_closedNoWith queue=true: include collected/rejected/canceled too.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Description adds context beyond readOnlyHint: 'newest first' ordering, default to open requests, and scope restrictions for queue. No contradiction with annotations. Provides clear behavioral insights (who sees what, filtering options).

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 sentences with an args summary and return type. Every sentence provides essential information. No redundant or filler content. Front-loaded with the main purpose.

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?

Given no output schema and 3 optional params, the description covers key behaviors: ordering, scoping, defaults, and required permissions. Could mention error handling or pagination, but it's sufficient for correct tool invocation.

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 has 100% description coverage. The description adds value by explaining queue usage (farm managers only), include_closed (full history), and limit defaults (20 vs 100 cap). This contextualizes the parameters beyond their schema definitions.

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 states the verb 'List' and the resource 'your print requests', and distinguishes between personal list and farm manager queue view. The tool name and title further reinforce this. It differentiates from sibling print tools (submit, cancel, update) by specifying the listing function.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: for personal requests (default) and for farm queue (with queue=true). Mentions optional parameters for closed requests and limit. Covers scope requirements (ft-member+, farm-manager). Lacks explicit exclusions or when not to use, but typical scenarios are well covered.

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

All Immersive Commons toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools are clearly scoped to distinct actions (e.g., ic_hack_apply vs. ic_hack_register, ic_rooms_create vs. ic_rooms_join). A few pairs could confuse an agent: floor10_submit_highlight vs. floorcast_push both submit HighlightStories but to different queues, and ic_directory_search / ic_agent_directory_lookup / ic_admin_list_members overlap in searching members. Overall, the long descriptions help disambiguate, but the volume requires careful reading.

Naming Consistency3/5

The dominant pattern is ic_<domain>_<verb>_<object> (e.g., ic_admin_list_pending_events, ic_headsets_checkout), but there are notable deviations: floor10_* and floorcast_* prefixes break the ic_ convention, and a few tools use noun-style names (ic_health, ic_capabilities, ic_donations_total). Verb placement also varies (get_* vs *_get, e.g., ic_get_my_membership vs. ic_membership_set_profile). Still, most names are readable and predictable.

Tool Count1/5

175 tools is an extreme count for a single MCP server, far beyond the 50+ threshold that indicates an unwieldy surface. While the platform covers many domains (events, files, hackathon, headsets, prints, rooms, etc.), bundling everything into one server makes discovery and selection difficult. This would be better split into several narrowly-scoped servers.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers nearly every lifecycle for each domain: CRUD for files/folders, full hackathon admissions and judging, headset lending with waivers and incidents, print farm submission and handoffs, and room coordination. Minor gaps exist: no delete for files/folders, no cancel for events, and some actions (like revoking a Z.ai key or tearing down a room) are explicitly left to human console use. Overall, the surface is remarkably comprehensive for the stated scope.

Resources