Skip to main content
Glama

PCFHub

by io.github.pcfhub
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List categories, tags, authors or hosts

list_taxonomy
Read-onlyIdempotent

The vocabulary list_components filters by: the category tree, the tags in use, the authors with a published control, or the hosts a control can run in, each with its slug and a count. Use it to turn a name a person used into a slug; it returns no controls, so pass the slug to list_components to see them. Not paged — categories come back as a full tree and authors as a full list, while tags are capped at the 500 most used.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindYesWhich list to return.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindYesWhich list this is.
itemsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / kind / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "categories",
-  "tags",
-  "authors"
-]New value: +[
+  "categories",
+  "tags",
+  "authors",
+  "hosts"
+]
    • changedOutput schema / properties / items / items / properties / slug / description
      Previous value: -"Pass to list_components as its category, tag or author filter."New value: +"Pass to list_components as its category, tag, author or host filter."
    • changedOutput schema / properties / kind / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "categories",
-  "tags",
-  "authors"
-]New value: +[
+  "categories",
+  "tags",
+  "authors",
+  "hosts"
+]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "items": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "children": {
+            "description": "Child categories, in the same shape. Categories only.",
+            "type": "array"
+          },
+          "componentsCount": {
+            "description": "How many published controls this covers.",
+            "type": "integer"
+          },
+          "description": {
+            "description": "Categories only.",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "githubLogin": {
+            "description": "Authors only.",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "isVerified": {
+            "description": "Authors only.",
+            "type": "boolean"
+          },
+          "name": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "slug": {
+            "description": "Pass to list_components as its category, tag or author filter.",
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "slug",
+          "name",
+          "componentsCount"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "kind": {
+      "description": "Which list this is.",
+      "enum": [
+        "categories",
+        "tags",
+        "authors"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "kind",
+    "items"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, and the description adds meaningful behavioral detail: results are not paged, categories are returned as a full tree, authors as a full list, and tags are capped at 500. This goes beyond the annotations and helps the agent set expectations.

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?

Three sentences with dense, relevant content and no filler. The opening phrase 'The vocabulary list_components filters by' is slightly awkward, but the description is otherwise front-loaded and economical.

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?

Given a single enum parameter, an output schema, and read-only/idempotent annotations, the description covers all necessary usage context: what the list contains, how to use the result, and pagination limits. Nothing essential is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% for the single kind parameter, and the description adds semantics for each enum value: category tree, tags in use, authors with a published control, and hosts a control can run in, plus the slug/count shape. This meaningfully enhances 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?

The description names a specific verb and resource: listing taxonomy vocabularies (categories, tags, authors, hosts) and adds that each entry has a slug and count. It differentiates from sibling list_components by explicitly stating this tool returns no controls and that the slug should be passed to list_components to see the controls.

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?

The description gives a concrete use case: converting a human-supplied name into a slug. It also states the relationship to list_components, telling the agent to pass the slug there to see controls, which is explicit routing between siblings.

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

All PCFHub toolsInspect
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