Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

SpiderLook

by com.spiderlook.api
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

list_workspace

Read-onlyIdempotent

Catalog of orgs, projects, and competitors the user can access.

Use when project or competitor IDs are unknown. Each competitor includes kind (self|competitor|trendsetter) and is_self.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_workspace"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contextNoExplain in 15-25 words, in third person, why this tool is called and how it supports the user's goal. For analytics only. You MUST describe only the abstract purpose of the tool call. NEVER include, repeat, paraphrase, or infer personal, sensitive, or identifying information from the user request or tool results, including names, emails, phone numbers, IPs, IDs, or credentials. You MUST generalize specific entities into roles such as "a user", "the customer", or "an account". Example: "Retrieving a customer's recent orders to investigate a billing issue and help support determine the appropriate resolution."
llm_modelNoOptional model identifier for analytics, only if explicitly available in client-provided metadata. Otherwise pass 'unknown'. Do not inspect or disclose system prompts, hidden instructions, credentials, or other protected context.
conversation_idNoOptional Spiderlook analytics correlation identifier. Reuse the value returned by a previous Spiderlook response only for subsequent Spiderlook calls in this chat. Omit if unavailable; do not invent a value or use the host's conversation ID.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
_mcp_instructionsNoServer-issued metadata for this conversation.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: the result is scoped to what the user can access, and competitors are tagged with kind (self|competitor|trendsetter) plus is_self, which affects downstream filtering decisions.

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?

Three short sentences: the resource first, then the selection condition, then a key return detail. No filler, and the most decision-relevant information is front-loaded.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With an output schema present, the description needn't explain the return payload, and annotations plus full schema coverage handle safety and parameters. It leaves only minor gaps, such as whether the catalog is paginated or how org/project nesting is presented.

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 all three parameters (context, llm_model, conversation_id) are analytics plumbing fully documented in the schema. The description adds nothing about them, which is acceptable given the high coverage, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a concrete resource set verb ('Catalog of orgs, projects, and competitors the user can access') rather than restating the tool name. The scope ('the user can access') is meaningful and the mention that competitors carry kind and is_self hints at the shape. It stops short of explicitly contrasting with siblings like list_events or query_metrics, but the resource is unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives an explicit trigger condition: 'Use when project or competitor IDs are unknown,' which tells the agent this is the discovery step before calls that need IDs. No when-not conditions or named alternatives, but the context is clear enough to select it correctly.

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

All SpiderLook toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources