SuperPost

List ideas

list_ideas

Read-onlyIdempotent

Reads the workspace idea catalog with optional generic text search, source provenance search, topic, label, and cursor-based pagination. Ideas rejected across three distinct content units, and Ideas linked to a source asset with three such rejects, are omitted from automatic discovery; one or two rejections lower their order. suppressedCount reports rejected Ideas omitted from the bounded pages scanned. The lookahead cursor carries any unreturned candidates into the next request so feedback ranking does not skip them. If the user explicitly asks for one omitted Idea, use get_context with its exact Idea ID. The sourceQuery filter matches source author, handle, source title or filename, provider, remote item ID, or URL; English/Russian transliterations match, and | separates alternate spellings. Provenance search does not match names mentioned only in idea text or source excerpts. Returned source attributions are bounded. This is read-only.

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_ideas"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`sort`	No		updatedAt
`label`	No
`limit`	No
`topic`	No
`cursor`	No
`search`	No
`direction`	No		desc
`sourceQuery`	No	Search saved provenance metadata, such as an author or source filename. English/Russian transliterations are supported; use \| to include alternate spellings.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`items`	Yes
`nextCursor`	No
`totalCount`	Yes
`suppressedCount`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 14, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / suppressedCount

Added value: +{
+  "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "integer"
+}

First observedNov 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/closed-world, yet the description adds substantial behavior the annotations do not: suppression rules (three rejected content units, or a source-linked asset with three rejects, are omitted; one or two rejects demote order), the suppressedCount report, and lookahead-cursor carry-over so ranking does not skip candidates. 'This is read-only' mildly restates readOnlyHint but introduces no contradiction.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Purpose is front-loaded and nearly every sentence adds operational detail. The cost is density: long semicolon-chained sentences and jargon like 'three distinct content units' and 'bounded pages scanned' slow comprehension, though little is genuinely wasteful.

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 return-value explanation is rightly omitted, and the description still covers the non-obvious suppression and ranking behavior plus sourceQuery matching scope. Gaps remain around ordering controls (sort/direction) and topic/label matching semantics, which are the least self-evident undocumented parameters.

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 coverage is 13%, so the description must carry most parameter meaning. It does explain `search` as generic text matching vs `sourceQuery` as provenance metadata (author, handle, title/filename, provider, remote ID, URL, transliteration, `|` alternation) and clarifies `cursor`/`limit` via bounded pages and lookahead. However `sort`, `direction`, `label`, and `topic` are only named, with no added semantics.

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 first sentence gives a specific verb ('Reads') and resource ('the workspace idea catalog') and enumerates the supported filter dimensions (text search, source provenance, topic, label, cursor pagination). It also names the sibling it is not — get_context — for the single-Idea case, so an agent can route without opening either 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?

The description gives a clear when-to-use context (browsing/discovering the idea catalog, optionally filtered) and one explicit alternative: 'If the user explicitly asks for one omitted Idea, use get_context with its exact Idea ID.' It also disambiguates the two search parameters (generic `search` vs provenance `sourceQuery`). It stops short of stating when-not to use this in favor of list_posts or search_sources.

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

All SuperPost 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?