list_charts
List 70 chart examples.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
ng-blatui
TDQS
B3/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided. Description only says 'list 70 chart examples'—implied read-only, but no disclosure of ordering, pagination, or potential side effects. Minimal behavioral transparency.
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?
Single sentence is concise and front-loaded. However, it is too sparse even for a simple list; slightly more context would improve without losing conciseness.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness2/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With no output schema, no annotations, and no extra description, the tool lacks context on what chart examples contain, how to interpret results, or any usage notes. Incomplete for a listing tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters4/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
No parameters exist (schema coverage 100%). Baseline score of 4 for zero-parameter tools applies; description adds no extra parameter meaning but no deficiency.
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?
Description states the verb 'list' and resource 'chart examples' with a specific count (70). Purpose is clear as a listing operation, but does not differentiate from sibling list tools like list_blocks or list_templates.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines2/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., search, list_components). The description is too brief to imply any selection criteria or context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: listing different resource types, getting specific documentation, and keyword search. No overlap exists.
Naming Consistency4/5
Tools consistently use 'get_' and 'list_' prefixes, but 'search' deviates slightly from the verb_noun pattern, though it remains predictable.
Tool Count5/5
Seven tools is well-scoped for a component library server, covering listing, searching, and retrieving details without unnecessary bloat.
Completeness5/5
The tool surface covers the full workflow: discover resources via list and search, then get detailed docs or API. No obvious gaps for the stated purpose.