PCFHub

List a control's documentation

list_doc_sections

Read-onlyIdempotent

The documentation sections one control publishes — overview, installation, canvas, model_driven, examples, limitations and so on — each with its title and URL. Use it before get_doc_page to learn which sections that control actually has; it returns no page content, and get_component covers the property reference. A control with no documentation and a slug that does not exist return the same error on purpose, so fall back to search rather than concluding the slug is wrong.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`slug`	Yes	The control's slug, e.g. "pcf-tag-list".

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`slug`	Yes	The control the sections belong to.
`sections`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 16, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "sections": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "section": {
+            "description": "Pass to get_doc_page as its section argument.",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "title": {
+            "description": "The section's heading, as the author wrote it.",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "url": {
+            "description": "Absolute URL of the page.",
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "section",
+          "title",
+          "url"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "slug": {
+      "description": "The control the sections belong to.",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "slug",
+    "sections"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond those: it returns no page content and it deliberately returns the same error for a documented control with no sections and a non-existent slug. This error-handling disclosure is valuable for an agent deciding whether to trust the slug or fall back to search.

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?

Three sentences, each with a distinct job: what the tool returns, when to use it versus siblings, and how to interpret its error behavior. No filler or repetition, and the core purpose is front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a single-parameter, read-only list tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose, return scope, exclusions, sibling routing, and an important error ambiguity. An agent has everything needed to call this correctly and interpret the result.

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% for the single 'slug' parameter, including an example, so the description does not need to add much. The description reinforces that the slug identifies the control, but it does not add substantially new parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: listing the documentation sections a control publishes, with examples of section types and their title/URL. It explicitly contrasts itself with get_doc_page and get_component, so an agent can distinguish it from siblings without opening their schemas.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use it before get_doc_page to learn which sections that control actually has.' It also states what it does not return, points to get_component for the property reference, and advises falling back to search when the error is ambiguous.

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

All PCFHub 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?