Skip to main content
Glama

mcp-server

by com.quelvio

list_domains

Read-onlyIdempotent

List the taxonomy domains the company has indexed — with document counts, expert counts, and coverage levels — so an agent can decide whether to query before spending a Knowledge Token. Returns one row per domain with the canonical taxonomy_domain slug, document/chunk counts, expert count, coverage level (expert | partial | none), the single_expert risk flag, and the top contributor by authority. Use the slug as the domain filter on a follow-up query_knowledge call. Zero Knowledge Tokens consumed.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
coverage_filterNoOptional comma-separated subset of expert,partial,none. Default: all three. Unknown tokens 400.

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint), the description adds that zero Knowledge Tokens are consumed, details the returned fields, and explains parameter behavior (default, error for unknown tokens), providing comprehensive behavioral context.

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?

The description is concise (4 sentences), front-loaded with purpose, and each sentence adds value: purpose, return details, follow-up usage, and cost.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description fully covers what is returned, parameter behavior, cost, and integration with sibling tool, leaving no gaps.

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%, and the description only repeats the schema's parameter description without adding new semantic information about the input parameter.

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 tool lists taxonomy domains with document counts, expert counts, and coverage levels, and explicitly differentiates from siblings by explaining it helps decide whether to query before spending a Knowledge Token.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (before querying to avoid spending tokens) and instructs to use the returned slug as the domain filter on a follow-up query_knowledge call, providing clear usage guidance.

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

All mcp-server 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

A4.6/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool serves a distinct purpose: get_source_detail provides provenance for previous queries, list_domains lists available knowledge domains, and query_knowledge performs the actual search. No overlap in functionality.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with lowercase and underscores: get_source_detail, list_domains, query_knowledge. The naming is uniform and predictable.

Tool Count4/5

With only three tools, the set is minimal but well-scoped for a read-only knowledge query interface. It covers the essential workflow without unnecessary tools, though a few more (e.g., to list query history) could be beneficial.

Completeness4/5

The tools cover the core workflow: domain exploration (list_domains), knowledge querying (query_knowledge), and provenance retrieval (get_source_detail). Missing is a way to list past queries or manage the knowledge base, but these are outside the apparent intended scope.

Resources