Ross ERP Data Dictionary

list_facilities

Browse and filter Ross ERP 8.0 UI facilities (menu screens/functions). Filter by system, database, class, a name/code substring, or withTables (only facilities whose table cluster is known); paginate with limit/offset. Returns summaries — use lookup_facility for full detail.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`q`	No	Name or code substring, e.g. CHECK or AP_
`class`	No	Class filter: REPORT \| MAINTENANCE \| INQUIRY \| UPDATE \| TRANSACTION \| ARCHIVE \| CODES
`limit`	No	Max facilities (default 100)
`offset`	No	Pagination offset (default 0)
`system`	No	System filter, e.g. ACCOUNTS_PAYABLE or GENERAL_LEDGER
`database`	No	Database filter: FIN or MAN
`withTables`	No	Only facilities with a known table cluster (default false)

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that results are summaries, supports pagination, and clarifies the withTables filter. It does not explicitly state that it is a read-only operation, but 'browse' strongly implies it, and the return-summaries note adds useful transparency.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no fluff. Every sentence adds value: the first defines scope, the second lists filter capabilities, and the third clarifies the return type and points to a complementary tool.

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 tool's complexity, the description covers the core purpose, filtering options, pagination, and return type. It does not specify what the summaries contain or how to handle ordering, and no output schema is provided, but the pointer to lookup_facility partially compensates. It is nearly complete for a listing tool.

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 already provides 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all seven parameters. The tool description names the filter dimensions but adds little beyond what the schema states, so it remains at the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 clearly states that the tool browses and filters Ross ERP 8.0 UI facilities, specifying the resource and the action. It also differentiates from lookup_facility by noting that this tool returns summaries while lookup_facility provides full detail.

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 clear context for when to use this tool (browsing/filtering summaries) and explicitly recommends lookup_facility for full detail. However, it does not mention when to prefer search_facilities or other sibling tools, so it is not fully explicit about all alternatives.

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

All Ross ERP Data Dictionary tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: list/lookup/search pairs are separated by summary vs full detail, exact match vs fuzzy search, and domain scope. Cross-reference tools are explicitly paired as reverse lookups (facility_programs/program_facilities, table_facilities/table_programs), eliminating ambiguity. Minor overlaps like find_column vs search_columns and get_ddl vs lookup_table are well-differentiated by their descriptions.

Naming Consistency4/5

The naming is largely predictable with list_ for browsing, lookup_ for full detail, search_ for searching, and _stats for overviews. Cross-links follow a noun_noun pattern (facility_programs, table_facilities). Exceptions like find_column, get_ddl, graph_neighbors, and path_between are still intuitive and do not create confusion, though they deviate from the dominant verb-first pattern.

Tool Count3/5

At 21 tools, the set sits in the 16-25 range that feels heavy. However, each tool serves a distinct function across schema, facilities, programs, columns, and graph traversal, so the count is justified for a comprehensive data dictionary. It is not as tightly scoped as a typical CRUD server, but the breadth is necessary for the domain.

Completeness5/5

The tool set provides complete coverage for a read-only data dictionary: browsing, searching, full details, and cross-references for every entity type (objects, columns, facilities, programs), plus graph utilities. There are no obvious dead ends or missing operations; stats and search-all tools further enhance orientation and cross-domain discovery.

Resources

Need Help?