Skip to main content
Glama

Local MCP

by com.local-mcp
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Recipe List

recipe_list
Read-only

Lists the user's reusable SKILLS — saved recipes (an ordered sequence of LMCP tool calls with parameters) — each runnable with recipe_run. Skills turn a repeated LMCP workflow into one reusable command. A user would list them to find an existing skill for a task rather than rebuilding it from scratch. Returns each skill's name, description, and steps.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
recipesNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "recipes": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "description": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "name": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "params": {
+            "description": "Declared parameters (name/type/default).",
+            "items": {
+              "additionalProperties": true,
+              "type": "object"
+            },
+            "type": "array"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that each skill's name, description, and steps are returned, but says nothing about ordering, pagination, or behavior when the user has no saved skills — and the output schema already carries the return shape.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with the parenthetical definition earning its place by explaining an unfamiliar domain term. The closing sentence on return fields is partly redundant with the output schema but still short and useful.

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?

Zero parameters, an existing output schema, and read-only annotations mean the description's burden is mostly conceptual, and it defines 'skill' clearly. The remaining gap is relational: it does not distinguish this listing from recipe_get/recipe_discover in the sibling set.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. It correctly implies the call is unscoped (lists the user's skills) rather than requiring a filter argument.

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 ('Lists the user's reusable SKILLS — saved recipes') and defines what a skill is (an ordered sequence of LMCP tool calls with parameters). This definition makes it distinguishable from nearby siblings like recipe_get, recipe_run, and recipe_discover without opening their schemas.

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?

Gives an implied use case ('to find an existing skill for a task rather than rebuilding it from scratch') and points at recipe_run as the execution counterpart. However, it never says when to prefer this over recipe_get (single recipe) or recipe_discover, and gives no exclusion criteria — an agent must infer the routing.

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

All Local MCP 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