Skip to main content
Glama

List project remix actions

list_project_remix_actions
Read-onlyIdempotent

Return remix actions for a project with action ids, types, status, progress, attempts, and error details, plus pagination metadata. Poll after remix_project to determine when edits are ready for export.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "projectId": "<projectId>"
    },
    "name": "list_project_remix_actions"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectIdYesEditable project to inspect. Use projectId from a workflow result or list_projects.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
hasMoreYesWhether another page is available.
nextCursorYesCursor for the next page, or null.
remixActionsYesRemix actions for the project.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • removedOutput schema / properties / nextCursor / anyOf
      Removed value: -[
      -  {
      -    "type": "string"
      -  },
      -  {
      -    "type": "null"
      -  }
      -]
    • addedOutput schema / properties / nextCursor / type
      Added value: +[
      +  "string",
      +  "null"
      +]
    • changedOutput schema / properties / remixActions / items / properties / error / anyOf
      Previous value: -[
      -  {
      -    "additionalProperties": {},
      -    "properties": {
      -      "code": {
      -        "anyOf": [
      -          {
      -            "type": "string"
      -          },
      -          {
      -            "type": "null"
      -          }
      -        ],
      -        "description": "Machine-readable error code."
      -      },
      -      "internalErrorCode": {
      -        "anyOf": [
      -          {
      -            "type": "string"
      -          },
      -          {
      -            "type": "null"
      -          }
      -        ],
      -        "description": "Opaque code for support."
      -      },
      -      "message": {
      -        "description": "Human-readable error description.",
      -        "type": "string"
      -      },
      -      "requirement": {
      -        "anyOf": [
      -          {
      -            "additionalProperties": {},
      -            "properties": {
      -              "details": {
      -                "additionalProperties": {
      -                  "type": "string"
      -                },
      -                "propertyNames": {
      -                  "type": "string"
      -                },
      -                "type": "object"
      -              },
      -              "type": {
      -                "description": "Requirement type (e.g. purchase_add_on).",
      -                "type": "string"
      -              }
      -            },
      -            "required": [
      -              "type"
      -            ],
      -            "type": "object"
      -          },
      -          {
      -            "type": "null"
      -          }
      -        ],
      -        "description": "What is needed to resolve the error, when applicable."
      -      }
      -    },
      -    "required": [
      -      "message"
      -    ],
      -    "type": "object"
      -  },
      -  {
      -    "type": "null"
      -  }
      -]New value: +[
      +  {
      +    "additionalProperties": {},
      +    "properties": {
      +      "code": {
      +        "description": "Machine-readable error code.",
      +        "type": [
      +          "string",
      +          "null"
      +        ]
      +      },
      +      "internalErrorCode": {
      +        "description": "Opaque code for support.",
      +        "type": [
      +          "string",
      +          "null"
      +        ]
      +      },
      +      "message": {
      +        "description": "Human-readable error description.",
      +        "type": "string"
      +      },
      +      "requirement": {
      +        "anyOf": [
      +          {
      +            "additionalProperties": {},
      +            "properties": {
      +              "details": {
      +                "additionalProperties": {
      +                  "type": "string"
      +                },
      +                "propertyNames": {
      +                  "type": "string"
      +                },
      +                "type": "object"
      +              },
      +              "type": {
      +                "description": "Requirement type (e.g. purchase_add_on).",
      +                "type": "string"
      +              }
      +            },
      +            "required": [
      +              "type"
      +            ],
      +            "type": "object"
      +          },
      +          {
      +            "type": "null"
      +          }
      +        ],
      +        "description": "What is needed to resolve the error, when applicable."
      +      }
      +    },
      +    "required": [
      +      "message"
      +    ],
      +    "type": "object"
      +  },
      +  {
      +    "type": "null"
      +  }
      +]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / projectId / description
      Previous value: -"Project id."New value: +"Editable project to inspect. Use projectId from a workflow result or list_projects."
  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, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds a polling/workflow role but says nothing about rate limits, latency, or whether pagination requires follow-up calls, leaving that behavior opaque.

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?

Two sentences, both front-loaded and purposeful: the first covers what is returned, the second covers when to call it. There is no redundant or filler wording.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description needn't enumerate return values, and the polling guidance supplies the missing workflow context. The only soft spot is the mention of "pagination metadata" with no explanation of how paging is controlled given the schema exposes only projectId.

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?

With a single required parameter at 100% schema description coverage, the schema already explains where projectId comes from (workflow result or list_projects). The description adds no further meaning about the parameter, which matches the baseline 3 for high-coverage schemas.

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 and resource ("Return remix actions for a project") and enumerates what each action contains (ids, types, status, progress, attempts, errors), so an agent can distinguish it from list_projects or get_project without opening a schema.

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?

It gives a concrete when-to-use rule — "Poll after remix_project to determine when edits are ready for export" — which ties the tool directly to a sibling and a workflow stage. It stops short of stating when not to use it or how often to poll, so it falls shy of a full 5.

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.