Skip to main content
Glama

Synap

by com.linkrra
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List Synap models and prices

synap_list_models
Read-onlyIdempotent

List the models Synap serves right now, each with its price per million tokens, context window and what it is good at. Use this to choose a model id before calling synap_chat_completion, or to compare prices. Free, read-only, no API key needed, and safe to call repeatedly; the list is live, so models can appear or go between calls. Returns {"object":"list","count":N,"data":[{id,name,capability,tier,context_tokens,max_output_tokens,pricing,data_policy}]}; pricing is USD per million prompt and completion tokens and is absent for the auto-routing ids ("synap-v1"), which bill at the price of the model they route to. For every field of one model use synap_get_model.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryNoOptional case-insensitive filter matched against model id, name and capability, e.g. "coder", "qwen" or "vision". Omit to list everything.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / query
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional case-insensitive filter matched against model id, name and capability, e.g. \"coder\", \"qwen\" or \"vision\". Omit to list everything.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, but the description adds substantial context they cannot convey: no API key required, free, safe to call repeatedly, and critically that the list is live so models may appear/disappear between calls. It also documents the return payload shape and the pricing semantics (USD per million prompt/completion tokens, absent for auto-routing ids that bill at the routed model's price).

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then usage, then behavioral caveats, then the return shape. The inline JSON skeleton is long but justified because no output schema exists. Slightly dense, but nearly every clause carries information an agent needs before calling.

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?

With no output schema and annotations covering only safety, the description fully compensates: it describes the response envelope and each field, the pricing units, the auto-routing pricing exception, and the live-list volatility. Nothing needed to select and call this tool correctly is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the single optional `query` parameter is fully documented there (case-insensitive, matched against id/name/capability, with examples). The description adds no meaning beyond the schema for this parameter, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 and resource ('List the models Synap serves right now') and immediately enumerates the returned attributes: price per million tokens, context window, and capability. It is clearly distinguishable from synap_chat_completion (which consumes a model id) and synap_get_model (which drills into one model).

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives explicit when-to-use conditions: choose a model id before calling synap_chat_completion, or compare prices. It also routes the agent to the alternative, synap_get_model, for the full field set of a single model, so both the positive and the negative case are covered.

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

All Synap 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