Apideck MCP

list_tools

Read-onlyIdempotent

Discover Apideck tools. Call with no args for domain index; filter with domain/search_terms/scope.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`scope`	No	Filter by mutation scope: "read" (no writes), "write" (creates/updates), or "destructive" (deletes/overwrites). Omit to include all scopes.
`domain`	No	Restrict results to a single tool domain (e.g. "accounting", "hris"). Omit to get the cross-domain index. Use a key returned by a prior no-arg call.
`search_terms`	No	Case-insensitive substring terms ANDed across a tool name/description (e.g. ["invoice","create"]). Omit to list everything in the domain.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed5 schema fields changedJun 17, 2026

removedInput schema / $schema

Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"

addedInput schema / properties / domain / description

Added value: +"Restrict results to a single tool domain (e.g. \"accounting\", \"hris\"). Omit to get the cross-domain index. Use a key returned by a prior no-arg call."

addedInput schema / properties / scope / description

Added value: +"Filter by mutation scope: \"read\" (no writes), \"write\" (creates/updates), or \"destructive\" (deletes/overwrites). Omit to include all scopes."

addedInput schema / properties / search_terms / description

Added value: +"Case-insensitive substring terms ANDed across a tool name/description (e.g. [\"invoice\",\"create\"]). Omit to list everything in the domain."

addedInput schema / required
```
Added value: +[]
```

Changed3 schema fields changedApr 30, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / domain
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```

addedInput schema / properties / scope

Added value: +{
+  "enum": [
+    "read",
+    "write",
+    "destructive"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

removedInput schema / properties / search_terms / description

Removed value: -"Filter the list of tools.\nEach term is matched case-insensitively as a substring against tool name, description, and scopes.\nMultiple terms are combined with a logical OR: a tool is included if ANY term matches ANY field.\nIf not provided, all tools are returned."

First observedApr 20, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the behavioral nuance of the no-args call and the filtering options, providing context beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and includes essential usage instructions without any redundant words or fluff.

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?

For a simple discovery tool with comprehensive schema and annotations, the description covers the main usage patterns (no-arg and filtered). It doesn't describe the return format, but the purpose and filtering behavior are sufficiently clear for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 schema already explains each parameter in detail. The description merely restates parameter names without adding new semantics, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 starts with 'Discover Apideck tools,' which clearly states the action and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on discovery/listing rather than execution or input description, and the mention of filtering adds specificity.

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 gives explicit usage modes: call with no args for a domain index, or filter by domain/search_terms/scope. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, but the purpose is clear enough that the agent can infer when to use this tool versus siblings like execute_tool or describe_tool_input.

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

All Apideck MCP tools Inspect

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

Need Help?