Skip to main content
Glama

DocuQueue MCP

by io.github.dvcoolarun
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

list_templates

Read-onlyIdempotent

Browse available document designs.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tagsNoFilter by tags
queryNoSearch term to filter templates
categoryNoFilter by category (e.g., invoice, receipt, form)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
templatesYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / category / description
      Added value: +"Filter by category (e.g., invoice, receipt, form)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / query / description
      Added value: +"Search term to filter templates"
    • addedInput schema / properties / tags / description
      Added value: +"Filter by tags"
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "templates": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "category": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "description": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "id": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "name": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "tags": {
+            "items": {
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            "type": "array"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "templates"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the light 'available' scope and no additional behavioral detail such as pagination or visibility rules, but it does not contradict the annotations.

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 sentence with no filler, and the core action is front-loaded. It is appropriately compact for a simple read-only list operation.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the output schema and full parameter documentation, the description is nearly sufficient for a straightforward list tool. However, the presence of list_deck_templates creates an ambiguity the description does not resolve, leaving tool selection slightly under-specified.

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 describes all three parameters (tags, query, category) with 100% coverage, so the baseline applies. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but the schema already fully compensates for that.

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?

The description uses a specific verb ('Browse') and identifies the resource as available document designs, making the basic operation clear. However, it does not distinguish this tool from the sibling list_deck_templates, so it falls short of full differentiation.

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 is provided about when to use list_templates versus list_deck_templates or other siblings. The filtering parameters imply browsing use cases, but the description gives no context, exclusions, or alternative routing.

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

All DocuQueue MCP 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