Skip to main content
Glama

questionBank_list

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists the question banks of a project - the same banks the Creator's question bank list shows; pass a projectId to look into another project, omitting it lists the banks of the project the API key is scoped to (the personal ones for a user API key). Always paginated - page defaults to 1 and pageSize to 12 even when both are omitted, unlike questionBank_getItems which returns everything by default; a bank list can be large enough that "everything" is never the right default here. An invalid page/pageSize (zero, negative, non-numeric, fractional, or a pageSize over 50) is rejected outright rather than silently clamped. Use questionBank_templateList instead for the built-in starter banks.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoPage number (default: 1). Always applies, even when page and pageSize are both omitted: unlike questionBank_getItems, this never returns every bank at once. Zero, negative, non-numeric or fractional is rejected, not rounded.
tagsNoFilter by tag IDs (array of integers), as returned by questionBank_tagList. Omit to ignore tags.
searchNoSearch term to filter banks by title.
sortByNoSort field: "createdAt" or "modifiedAt". Defaults to "createdAt".
pageSizeNoItems per page (default: 12, max: 50). Same validation as page; over 50 is rejected, not clamped.
projectIdNoThe project (team) ID whose banks you want, as returned by project_list. Omit for the banks of the project the API key is scoped to (your personal ones on a user API key).
sortOrderNoSort direction: "ASC" or "DESC". Defaults to "DESC".
riddleTypeNoFilter by Riddle type ("Quiz" or "Poll"). Omit to list banks of every type.

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent behavior, and the description adds substantial context: pagination always applies, invalid page/pageSize values are rejected rather than clamped, and the result mirrors the Creator's question bank list. No contradiction with annotations.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and uses three dense, information-rich sentences. Every clause adds value, including the contrast with sibling tools and validation behavior, without repetition or fluff.

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 read-only annotations, fully documented schema, and the presence of sibling tools for comparison, the description covers the essential behavioral nuances: pagination defaults, validation strictness, project scoping, and when to use an alternative. No output schema is present, but the return value is implied by 'lists the question banks'.

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 each parameter already has a detailed description. The tool description reinforces defaults and validation for page/pageSize and projectId, but adds little beyond what the schema already states, so a baseline score is appropriate.

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 question banks for a project and explicitly distinguishes it from siblings like questionBank_getItems and questionBank_templateList. The verb-resource pairing is specific and unambiguous.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives: it contrasts pagination behavior with questionBank_getItems and directs users to questionBank_templateList for starter banks. Also explains projectId scoping and default behavior.

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

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Tools are largely distinct by name and detailed descriptions, with clear prefixes (riddle_builder_*, questionBank_*, stats_*). Some potential confusion exists among the stats tools (stats_fetch vs stats_overview_fetch vs breakdowns) but descriptions clarify their different scopes. Overall, an agent can usually pick the right tool.

Naming Consistency4/5

Naming follows a predictable prefix+verb pattern within each domain (e.g., riddle_builder_quiz, riddle_builder_poll; riddle_get, riddle_publish). Minor inconsistencies exist, like the camelCase 'questionBank' and 'riddleTemplate' prefixes vs snake_case elsewhere, and 'stats_overview_fetch' ordering, but these are not chaotic and remain readable.

Tool Count1/5

With 62 tools, this far exceeds the recommended 3-15 range and even the 25+ threshold. While the server covers a broad domain, the extreme number overwhelms and makes tool selection harder, fitting the 'extreme mismatch' criterion for 50+ tools.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface is exceptionally comprehensive, covering creation, reading, updating, deleting, publishing, unpublishing, moving, tagging, template management, question banks, palettes, and various stats breakdowns. There are no obvious gaps in the lifecycle of managing interactive content, and all apparent operations are supported.

Resources