Skip to main content
Glama

canton-ccpedia

by io.github.UnityNodes
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

search_mailing_list

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search across CCPEDIA's indexed Canton mailing-list archives (cip-discuss, cip-vote, grants-discuss, validator-announce, etc). Canton-specific.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
groupNoOptional group_slug filter, e.g. "cip-discuss".
limitNoMax rows (default 10).
queryYesFree-text query. Appears in subject or body.
offsetNoSkip this many before returning, for paging past the limit. The response states the full count and echoes the offset used.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / offset
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 0,
+  "description": "Skip this many before returning, for paging past the limit. The response states the full count and echoes the offset used.",
+  "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / query / description
      Previous value: -"Free-text query — appears in subject or body."New value: +"Free-text query. Appears in subject or body."
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds minor context (e.g., 'indexed' and 'Canton-specific') but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like pagination behavior or result ordering, which are partly addressed in the schema.

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 immediately conveys the tool's scope and purpose. It includes concrete examples without unnecessary elaboration, earning full marks for conciseness.

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 search functionality, the description is complete enough. The schema covers all parameters, and annotations cover safety. The lack of an output schema is partially mitigated by offset's description mentioning response counts, but the description itself could mention that results are from an indexed corpus.

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 provides 100% coverage of all four parameters with descriptions, so the description does not need to explain them. The description's mention of group names (e.g., 'cip-discuss') adds mild context to the 'group' parameter but does not significantly enhance parameter understanding beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Search') tied to a clear resource ('CCPEDIA's indexed Canton mailing-list archives') and lists example group names. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_mailing_thread and list_mailing_threads by focusing on cross-archive search.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool: searching mailing-list archives with a specific Canton focus. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives such as search_community or semantic_search, leaving room for ambiguity.

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

All canton-ccpedia 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