Skip to main content
Glama

iClips

by io.github.mcp-dir

iclips_pieces_list

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lê o catálogo de peças da agência no iClips. Ações:

  • list: busca textual opcional por q, mais filtros por categoria, status e basedOnTemplateId. Pagine com page e pageSize (padrão 20).

  • get: detalhe de uma ou mais peças por piece_ids, incluindo o workflowJson e o checklistJson completos (em lote, com erro reportado por id).

[Flattened action: list]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qNo
pageNo
statusNo
accountNo
pageSizeNo
categoriaNo
piece_idsNo
basedOnTemplateIdNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing pagination defaults (pageSize 20), supported filters, batch retrieval behavior, and per-id error reporting for the get action. The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, and the description does not contradict them.

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?

The description is compact, front-loaded with the overall purpose, and uses clear bullets for the two actions. The trailing '[Flattened action: list]' marker adds minor noise but does not undermine readability.

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?

The description covers the main operation modes, common filters, pagination, and the special payloads returned by get. However, there is no output schema, no return-shape description, and no explanation of the account parameter, so an agent still has notable gaps when invoking the tool correctly.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate for missing parameter meaning. It explains q, categoria, status, basedOnTemplateId, page, pageSize, and piece_ids, but it omits account entirely, and it gives no format or allowed-value guidance for status or basedOnTemplateId.

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 clearly states the tool reads the agency's piece catalog on iClips and enumerates two specific actions: list and get. It is a specific verb + resource, but it does not differentiate itself from the sibling iclips_pieces_get, which creates some ambiguity about why both exist.

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 clear internal usage context: use list for optional text search with filters and pagination, use get for detailed piece data including workflowJson and checklistJson in batch. It stops short of explicitly saying when not to use this tool or naming alternatives such as iclips_pieces_get.

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

All iClips 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

B3.2/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Many tools are near-duplicates, such as iclips_financial_entries_get/list, iclips_pieces_get/list, iclips_pieces_write_create/update/checklist, and iclips_workflow_templates_get/list, all sharing essentially the same description. authenticate and connect also overlap on session/connection status, so an agent must rely on brittle naming conventions rather than clear semantic boundaries.

Naming Consistency2/5

The iClips tools mostly follow iclips_<resource>_<action>, but the server mixes noun-only names like iclips_financial_accounts and marketplace, camelCase platform names like toolkit_info and show_version, and artificial get/list flattened duplicates. The pattern is only predictable within a subset of the tool list, not across the entire server.

Tool Count2/5

At 30 tools, the set is over-inflated for its actual scope: most are flattened get/list or write-action variants of roughly a dozen underlying iClips operations, plus six unrelated platform utilities. The domain could be cleanly served in about half this many tools without losing functionality.

Completeness2/5

Jobs and pieces have reasonable CRUD coverage, but there is no client/group or destination master lookup even though clientId is required to create a job and destination_id filters financial entries. Job pieces and tasks also lack delete operations, and financial categories are not enumerable, leaving noticeable dead ends for common workflows.

Resources