Genaya

List prepared and completed changes

list_actions

Read-onlyIdempotent

List the connected member's own Genaya AI actions from any surface, newest first (at most 25), or one by action_id - the way to learn the outcome after the member confirmed on a Genaya page. Optional status filter. Read-only, free.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_actions"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Rows to return (default and maximum 25).
`scope`	No	mine (default) or org - every member's rows, needs the audit permission.
`status`	No	Only rows in this state.
`action_id`	No	One action to read instead of a list.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`actions`	Yes
`has_more`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior. The description adds useful context beyond that: newest-first ordering, a 25-row maximum, availability from any surface, and the fact that it is free.

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?

It is a single dense sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then adds ordering, cap, ID lookup, usage context, status filtering, and safety/cost notes without filler.

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?

The tool has full schema descriptions, annotations, and an output schema, so the description does not need to explain return values. It is nearly complete, though it does not mention that scope can be org-wide or that doing so requires audit permission, which remains only in the schema.

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 100%, so the schema already explains limit, scope, status, and action_id. The description adds little parameter detail beyond noting the optional status filter and the action_id single-record mode, and it omits the org scope parameter entirely.

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: list the member's Genaya AI actions, newest first, capped at 25, or a single action by action_id. It also distinguishes the tool from mutation siblings by explaining it is how to learn the outcome after a confirmed action.

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 clear use case: learn the outcome after the member confirmed on a Genaya page. It also notes the status filter is optional, but it does not explicitly state when to use another sibling instead or mention the org-scope alternative.

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

All Genaya tools Inspect

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

Need Help?