Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Hugging Bay

by io.github.barneywohl
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

list_requests

Read-only

List public requests, optionally filtered by kind or status.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindNo
sortNo
limitNo
sinceNo
cursorNo
statusNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • removedInput schema / properties / limit / minimum
      Removed value: -1
    • removedInput schema / properties / since / format
      Removed value: -"date-time"
    • removedOutput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -true
  2. Changed6 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / cursor / description
      Removed value: -"Page cursor returned by the previous list."
    • removedInput schema / properties / kind / description
      Removed value: -"Type of model, feature, tool, integration or bug request."
    • removedInput schema / properties / limit / description
      Removed value: -"Maximum number of requests, from 1 to 100."
    • removedInput schema / properties / since / description
      Removed value: -"Include requests changed since this timestamp."
    • removedInput schema / properties / sort / description
      Removed value: -"Order by requester count or newest first."
    • removedInput schema / properties / status / description
      Removed value: -"Filter by the public lifecycle status: received, planned, built, declined or withdrawn."
  3. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / status / description
      Previous value: -"Filter by the request lifecycle status."New value: +"Filter by the public lifecycle status: received, planned, built, declined or withdrawn."
    • changedInput schema / properties / status / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "received",
-  "planned",
-  "in_progress",
-  "shipped",
-  "declined",
-  "duplicate",
-  "withdrawn"
-]New value: +[
+  "received",
+  "planned",
+  "built",
+  "declined",
+  "withdrawn"
+]
  4. Added

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that only public requests are returned, which is real context, but says nothing about pagination behavior despite cursor/limit/since existing 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.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single tight sentence with the resource and filters front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though efficiency here comes partly at the cost of the missing detail noted elsewhere.

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 six parameters, zero schema descriptions, and three pagination-related fields, the description is under-specified for an agent that must page through results. The output schema covers return values, but the calling semantics for limit/cursor/since remain a gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden, yet it explains only kind and status. Four parameters (sort, limit, since, cursor) — including the entire pagination mechanism — are left undocumented in both schema and description.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("List public requests") plus the two filter axes, which is enough to distinguish it from get_request. It does not, however, differentiate itself from adjacent siblings like request_feature or get_source_request_status.

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?

"Optionally filtered by kind or status" hints at usage but never states when to choose this over get_request for a single item, or over the request_* mutation siblings. No exclusions or prerequisites are given.

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

All Hugging Bay toolsInspect
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