list_births
List public births (names only), paginated.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No |
Progenly
by com.progenly
TDQS
C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It only mentions 'public' and 'names only', but lacks details on pagination mechanics, ordering, rate limits, or response format.
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?
The description is a single concise sentence, front-loaded with key information. However, it is slightly too brief, missing details that could be included without verbosity.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness2/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description omits specifics about return values (e.g., array of name strings), pagination limits, and how to navigate pages. Incomplete for a new user.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters2/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The description adds 'paginated' which implies the page parameter's role, but does not explain page size, default page, or other nuances. Schema coverage is 0%, so more detail is needed.
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', the resource 'births', and specifies 'public births (names only)' and 'paginated', distinguishing it from siblings like search_births and get_birth.
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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_births or get_birth. The description does not mention prerequisites or context.
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
B3.2/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool addresses a distinct operation: merge workflows (stage, join, lock, confirm, cancel, status) are separate from birth queries (get, list, search, random, certificate, lineage, verify) and auxiliary functions (stats, revocations, colony handle verification). No two tools have ambiguous purposes.
Naming Consistency4/5
Most tools follow a clear verb_noun pattern (cancel_merge, get_birth, list_births), with minor exceptions like 'merge_status' (noun_verb) and 'random_birth' (adjective_noun). The convention is largely consistent and readable.
Tool Count4/5
16 tools is a reasonable count for a system handling both birth certificates and merge intents. The number is well-scoped, not excessive, and each tool contributes to covering the domain without redundancy.
Completeness4/5
The tool surface covers the full merge lifecycle (stage, join, lock, confirm, cancel, status) and birth querying (get, list, search, random, certificate, lineage). While there is no explicit tool to create a birth (it is a product of a merge), the set feels complete for the intended workflows.