Skip to main content
Glama

Zoning Signal

by com.zoningsignal
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List Watch Items

list_watch_items
Read-onlyIdempotent

Return The Watch — the field's forward calendar of pending events, scheduled hearings, regulatory sunsets, and condition-triggered milestones the observatory is tracking. Filter by status (pending / resolved / obsolete), horizon (imminent / near-term / structural), or scope (place / corridor / brief). Use to surface what the field is watching from any cognitive position.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
briefNoOptional: filter to items linked to a specific named-pattern brief.
placeNoOptional: filter to items scoped to a specific place dossier (e.g., "leesburg-florida").
statusNoFilter by lifecycle status. Defaults to 'pending' (active watch items only); pass 'all' for the full corpus including resolved + obsolete entries.
horizonNoOptional: filter to items in the named horizon band. Imminent = ≤14 days; near-term = ≤90 days; structural = >90 days or condition-triggered.
corridorNoOptional: filter to items scoped to a specific corridor (e.g., "us-27-south-lake").

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countNo
statusNo
watch_itemsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "count": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "enum": [
+        "pending",
+        "resolved",
+        "obsolete",
+        "all"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "watch_items": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "outcome": {
+            "type": "object"
+          },
+          "scope": {
+            "type": "object"
+          },
+          "significance": {
+            "type": "object"
+          },
+          "slug": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "subtitle": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "title": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "trigger_date": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "trigger_type": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "url": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "slug",
+          "title",
+          "url"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is explicit. The description adds context about the nature of items (forward calendar, condition-triggered milestones) but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like defaults, pagination, or response format. It does not contradict annotations.

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 two sentences and front-loads the core purpose. It is concise, but the phrase 'from any cognitive position' is abstract and adds little practical value. Overall, it is efficient and easy to scan.

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 five optional parameters, an output schema, and strong annotations (read-only, idempotent), the description covers the essential aspects: what is returned, what filters are available, and the intended use. It does not need to explain return structure (output schema exists) or safety (annotations cover it). A little more detail about default status behavior would make it fully complete, but for a list tool this is sufficient.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage, with descriptions for every parameter (status, horizon, place, corridor, brief). The description repeats the filter categories at a high level ('status (pending / resolved / obsolete), horizon (imminent / near-term / structural), or scope (place / corridor / brief)') but adds no new syntax or format details beyond the schema. Baseline 3 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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Return The Watch — the field's forward calendar of pending events, scheduled hearings, regulatory sunsets, and condition-triggered milestones.' This makes clear what the tool does and distinguishes it from sibling describe_* and list_* tools by focusing on tracking items rather than describing a place or entity.

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?

The description says 'Use to surface what the field is watching from any cognitive position,' providing clear context for when to invoke the tool. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the use case is evident. A named alternative or exclusion would strengthen it, but the guidance is sufficient for an agent to choose this tool over siblings.

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

All Zoning Signal 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