Skip to main content
Glama

Duvo MCP

by io.github.duvoai

List Pulse Dashboard Messages

listPulseDashboardMessages
Read-onlyIdempotent

List the chat transcript of a Duvo Pulse dashboard's live version (requires edit access). Returns the most recent page by default, oldest first within the page; pass before (a message id from a previous page) to walk back through older messages. Messages from other version branches are not included.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum number of messages to return (1-500, default 50).
beforeNoMessage id cursor: return the page of messages immediately older than this message. Omit for the most recent page.
artifactIdYes

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, but the description adds meaningful behavioral context: the edit-access requirement, default page ordering (oldest first), pagination semantics with `before`, and the exclusion of other version branches. This goes well beyond annotation-provided facts.

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?

Three tightly scoped sentences: first defines purpose and access, second explains pagination behavior, third states the version exclusion. No filler or repetition of schema details, and the key information is front-loaded.

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?

For a read-only list tool with good annotations, the description covers purpose, access, pagination, and scope. No output schema exists, so a mention of return fields could improve completeness, but it is not essential given the straightforward nature of the 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?

Schema description coverage is 67% (limit and before have descriptions; artifactId doesn't). The description adds useful context for `before` (message id cursor from a previous page), but it does not explain the required artifactId parameter. It meets the baseline but does not fully compensate for the undocumented parameter.

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 opens with a specific action ('List the chat transcript') and a clearly defined resource ('Duvo Pulse dashboard's live version'). It also distinguishes this tool from siblings like listPulseDashboardVersions by explicitly limiting scope to the live version and excluding other version branches.

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 states a clear prerequisite (requires edit access), a key scope limitation (only live version, not other branches), and explains pagination usage ('pass before to walk back'). It does not explicitly name an alternative tool for other versions, so it just misses the bar for a 5.

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

All Duvo MCP toolsInspect
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

B3.1/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Despite detailed descriptions, many tool names are highly ambiguous, with multiple tools covering the same conceptual actions (e.g., acceptClarityCaptureSuggestion vs. acceptClarityTeamAssignmentSuggestion, or the many deleteClarity*Interview tools). The set is so large that distinguishing between, say, listClarityFolders, listClarityProcesses, and listClarityProcessSummaries requires reading deep into descriptions, reducing agent selection accuracy.

Naming Consistency4/5

The naming convention is predominantly verb_noun (e.g., createClarityProcess, listAgents, deleteQueue), and is remarkably consistent across the 316 tools. There are only minor deviations, such as 'fileSuggestedClarityProcesses' (verb + adjective noun) and 'bulkUpdateCasePriority' (where 'bulk' could be seen as a prefix), but overall the pattern holds strongly.

Tool Count1/5

With 316 tools, this server is extremely oversized for any single agent to manage effectively. The massive number of tools suggests poor modularization—many of these tools likely belong in separate, smaller servers focused on specific domains (e.g., Clarity, Pulse, Agent management). The cognitive load for an agent to choose from 316 options is very high, leading to frequent misselection.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers an extraordinarily wide range of operations across the Duvo platform: agents, runs, cases, queues, Clarity processes, skills, integrations, notifications, teams, and more. Most resource types have full CRUD and lifecycle management. Notable minor gaps exist (e.g., no tools for managing specific notification batch severities dynamically, and some interview management is missing batch operations), but for the platform's scope, coverage is impressively thorough.

Resources