Reconstruct

List replays

list_replays

Read-onlyIdempotent

List scenario replay runs stored under capture/replays for one product version.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`product`	Yes	Product key, for example finance-ozon-ru
`version`	Yes	Exact capture version returned by list_versions. Pin the same version across related calls; do not use latest as an alias.
`environment`	No	Environment ID from the selected backend platform type in list_platforms.options.platforms[].environments[].id (backend implementation). Omit only when the version has one captured environment. Use captured pairs from list_platforms/list_versions for actual availability.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes	Result entries

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 12, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / product / description

Added value: +"Product key, for example finance-ozon-ru"

addedInput schema / properties / version / description

Added value: +"Exact capture version returned by list_versions. Pin the same version across related calls; do not use latest as an alias."

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "description": "Structured result. Existing text or image content remains available in content.",
+  "properties": {
+    "result": {
+      "description": "Result entries",
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": true,
+        "description": "Stored replay summary",
+        "properties": {
+          "replay": {
+            "description": "replay",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "source": {
+            "anyOf": [
+              {
+                "description": "source",
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              {
+                "type": "null"
+              }
+            ]
+          },
+          "startedAt": {
+            "anyOf": [
+              {
+                "description": "startedAt",
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              {
+                "type": "null"
+              }
+            ]
+          },
+          "steps": {
+            "description": "Count or zero-based index",
+            "type": "integer"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "replay",
+          "startedAt",
+          "source",
+          "steps"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "result"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedOct 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the storage location and product-version scoping, which is useful context, but it does not disclose pagination behavior, result limits, or permission requirements.

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 a single front-loaded sentence that states the action and scope with no filler. Every part of the sentence carries useful information.

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?

Given the simple list operation, full schema coverage, rich annotations, and an output schema, the description is sufficient for an agent to call the tool correctly. It lacks only sibling/alternative guidance and explicit usage triggers, which leaves a small completeness gap.

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%, so product, version, and environment are fully documented in the schema itself. The description does not add any parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, making the baseline 3 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 gives a specific verb (List), resource (scenario replay runs), storage scope (under capture/replays), and a filtering constraint (for one product version). It is clear what the tool returns, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from similar siblings such as list_scenarios or list_versions.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied by the scope 'for one product version,' suggesting this is the tool to enumerate replays once a product and version are known. However, there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative, so the agent must infer the call context.

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

All Reconstruct tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?