Skip to main content
Glama

list_projects

List your projects.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoPage number for pagination (default: 1).
searchNoOptional text filter on the project name.
api_keyNoCatchAll API key. Optional if provided via x-api-key header or CATCHALL_API_KEY env var.
ownershipNoOptional ownership filter: 'all', 'own', or 'shared'.
page_sizeNoNumber of results per page (default: 100, max: 1000).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations, the description must cover behavioral traits. It fails to mention that this is a read-only operation, that results are paginated, or any authentication requirements. The description provides virtually no behavioral context beyond the tool's name.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is extremely short (one sentence) but under-specified. It lacks critical operational details for a 5-parameter tool, making it more under-specified than concise.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Despite having a complex input schema and an output schema, the description offers no context about pagination, filtering behavior, or the structure of results. It is incomplete even for a list tool.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides for parameters.

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 'List your projects.' clearly states the verb (list) and resource (projects). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like create_project, get_project, and delete_project.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool or when to prefer alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have distinct purposes, but some pairs like create_dataset vs create_dataset_from_csv or pull_results vs pull_job_csv could cause confusion. However, descriptions clarify differences.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., create_dataset, list_datasets) with minor exceptions like append_csv_to_dataset and pull_job_csv. Overall predictable.

Tool Count3/5

60 tools is high for an MCP server, but the domain (web research, job processing, multiple resource types) justifies the count. Still borders on excessive.

Completeness5/5

The server offers full CRUD for datasets, entities, monitors, projects, webhooks, plus job submission, status polling, result retrieval (JSON/CSV), webhook management, and health endpoints. No obvious gaps.