List all images stored in the Nevent media library for the current tenant. Returns each image's CDN URL (src), file name, MIME type, and size in bytes. Use the src value in in email template HTML, or pass it to nevent_delete_image to remove it.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's read-only nature aligns. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond annotations by specifying the exact returned fields (src URL, file name, MIME type, size in bytes) and the tenant-scoped listing behavior. This is useful for an agent deciding whether the tool satisfies a request.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is three sentences with no filler. The main purpose is front-loaded, the output fields are listed compactly, and the usage guidance is specific and actionable. Every sentence earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a zero-parameter read-only listing tool, the description is complete. It names the resource scope (Nevent media library, current tenant), the exact return fields, and how to use the returned values. Since there is no output schema, the description fully compensates by enumerating the important output attributes and downstream usage.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to explain about parameter semantics. The provided baseline of 4 applies because the parameter space is empty and no parameter guidance is needed. The description focuses instead on the output, which is appropriate for a no-input list operation.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
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 all images stored in the Nevent media library for the current tenant." It also clarifies the scope to the current tenant, which distinguishes it from broader list tools. The output fields are enumerated, leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description clearly establishes the context: retrieving media binary metadata for the current tenant. It also gives downstream usage instructions for the returned src value, including using it in email templates or passing it to nevent_delete_image. It does not explicitly name the alternative tools it competes with, but the context is clear enough.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most domain groups are distinct, but the campaign reporting cluster has three tools returning overlapping engagement metrics (get_campaign, get_campaign_metrics, campaign_report), and paid_ads_status vs paid_ads_health have fuzzy boundaries. The detailed descriptions mitigate but do not eliminate the risk of an agent calling the wrong tool.
All names use the nevent_ prefix and snake_case, and most CRUD operations follow verb_noun. However, several tools reverse the order or drop the verb entirely (segment_preview, segment_execute, campaign_report, paid_ads_status, analytics_query), making the convention mixed but still readable.
With 59 tools, this is far above the 25+ 'too many' threshold and falls into the 50+ extreme range. The broad domain coverage explains some of the size, but for an agent the set is likely to be overwhelming and harder to navigate than a more focused server.
The core marketing workflow (segments, templates, campaign creation, quote, schedule, metrics) is covered, but there is no way to update, cancel, or delete a campaign, and templates and segments lack delete operations. These are notable lifecycle gaps that agents will hit when users want to change or clean up resources.
