Skip to main content
Glama

List shaders

gripforge_shaders
Read-onlyIdempotent

List shaders from the GripForge catalog (authorized GodotShaders.com mirror). Returns { id, name, engines }. Search q=slash_reveal. Then pull with gripforge_shader_pull. 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": "gripforge_shaders"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qNoSearch id/name/alias (e.g. slash_reveal)
typeNoGodot shader_type
limitNoPage size (default 50, max 200)
offsetNoOffset

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds the return shape '{ id, name, engines }', the authorized mirror context, an example query, and 'Free,' which are behavioral facts not present in 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 three compact sentences that front-load the operation, then add return shape, an example query, and the next step. 'Free.' is short and supplies cost context without bloating the text.

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 low-complexity list tool with full schema descriptions and read-only annotations, the description is sufficient: it covers the operation, return fields, example filtering, and the correct follow-up tool. It does not explain default no-query behavior, but the schema's optional parameters and limit/offset fields cover that ground.

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 all four parameters are already documented. The description contributes a concrete q example, but type, limit, and offset semantics remain entirely in the schema, so it adds limited additional meaning.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List shaders from the GripForge catalog' and identifies the returned fields. It clearly distinguishes listing from retrieval by pointing to gripforge_shader_pull, so an agent can select the correct sibling.

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 workflow: 'Search q=slash_reveal. Then pull with gripforge_shader_pull,' which tells the agent when to use this list tool versus the pull tool. It does not explicitly contrast it with other list-like siblings, but the catalog scope and follow-up instruction provide clear context.

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.