Skip to main content
Glama

List water recipes

list_waters
Read-onlyIdempotent

List registered waters for the account. The id on each row is the number this account knows that record by, counting from 1: safe to show, and what other tools expect back.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statusNoFilter by status: current (unarchived), archived, or all. Defaults to current.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
watersYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changed
    • removedOutput schema / properties / waters / items / properties / calcium / type
      Removed value: -"null"
    • removedOutput schema / properties / waters / items / properties / magnesium / type
      Removed value: -"null"
    • removedOutput schema / properties / waters / items / properties / notes / type
      Removed value: -"null"
    • removedOutput schema / properties / waters / items / properties / sodium / type
      Removed value: -"null"
    • removedOutput schema / properties / waters / items / properties / tds / type
      Removed value: -"null"
    • removedOutput schema / properties / waters / items / properties / type / type
      Removed value: -"null"
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / waters / items
      Added value: +{
      +  "additionalProperties": true,
      +  "properties": {
      +    "archived": {
      +      "type": "integer"
      +    },
      +    "calcium": {
      +      "type": "null"
      +    },
      +    "gh": {
      +      "type": "integer"
      +    },
      +    "id": {
      +      "type": "integer"
      +    },
      +    "kh": {
      +      "type": "integer"
      +    },
      +    "magnesium": {
      +      "type": "null"
      +    },
      +    "name": {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "notes": {
      +      "type": "null"
      +    },
      +    "sodium": {
      +      "type": "null"
      +    },
      +    "tds": {
      +      "type": "null"
      +    },
      +    "type": {
      +      "type": "null"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "required": [
      +    "id",
      +    "name",
      +    "type",
      +    "tds",
      +    "gh",
      +    "kh",
      +    "sodium",
      +    "calcium",
      +    "magnesium",
      +    "notes",
      +    "archived"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "additionalProperties": true,
      +  "properties": {
      +    "waters": {
      +      "type": "array"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "required": [
      +    "waters"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  4. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish that this is a safe, read-only, idempotent operation, so the bar is lower. The description adds useful return-value context: each row's id is account-scoped, starts at 1, is safe to expose, and is what other tools expect. It does not cover ordering or pagination, but adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond 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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with purpose and followed by a relevant note about IDs. There is no wasted text.

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?

For a simple list tool with full schema coverage, strong annotations, and an output schema, the description supplies what is needed and adds an important note about ID semantics. Nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the only parameter is an enum with a clear description and default. The tool description does not add further meaning about the status filter, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'List registered waters for the account.' It is easy to distinguish from register_water or update_water, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from other list_* siblings.

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?

It says what the tool does but gives no guidance on when to use it versus related tools such as list_recipes or the register/update water tools. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative-selection hints.

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.

Resources