Skip to main content
Glama

Fruityvice

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List Fruits

list_fruits
Read-onlyIdempotent

List all available fruits with their nutritional profiles. Returns name, calories, protein, fat, carbs, sugar, and fiber for each.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countYesTotal number of fruits in the list
fruitsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "count": {
+      "description": "Total number of fruits in the list",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "fruits": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "family": {
+            "description": "Plant family classification",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "genus": {
+            "description": "Genus classification",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "id": {
+            "description": "Unique identifier for the fruit",
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "name": {
+            "description": "Name of the fruit",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "nutritions": {
+            "properties": {
+              "calories": {
+                "description": "Calories per 100g",
+                "type": "number"
+              },
+              "carbohydrates": {
+                "description": "Carbohydrates per 100g in grams",
+                "type": "number"
+              },
+              "fat": {
+                "description": "Fat content per 100g in grams",
+                "type": "number"
+              },
+              "protein": {
+                "description": "Protein content per 100g in grams",
+                "type": "number"
+              },
+              "sugar": {
+                "description": "Sugar content per 100g in grams",
+                "type": "number"
+              }
+            },
+            "required": [
+              "calories",
+              "fat",
+              "sugar",
+              "carbohydrates",
+              "protein"
+            ],
+            "type": "object"
+          },
+          "order": {
+            "description": "Order classification",
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "id",
+          "name",
+          "family",
+          "genus",
+          "order",
+          "nutritions"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "count",
+    "fruits"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {}
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds context beyond annotations by specifying the return fields (name, calories, protein, fat, carbs, sugar, fiber) and the scope 'all available fruits', which is useful behavioral information not present in the annotations.

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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and every word earns its place. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and output without fluff.

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 the absence of parameters, the presence of a rich output schema, and comprehensive annotations, the description is completely adequate. It states what the tool does and what it returns, which is all an agent needs to invoke it correctly.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline for this dimension is 4. The description has nothing to explain about parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% (vacuously). No additional parameter documentation is needed.

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 clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'all available fruits', and specifies the nutritional profiles returned. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_fruit (which likely retrieves a single fruit) and get_by_nutrition (which likely filters by nutritional criteria).

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage for retrieving the full inventory of fruits, but it does not explicitly mention when to use alternatives such as get_fruit or get_by_nutrition. There is no direct 'when to use this vs. that' guidance, though the phrase 'all available fruits' suggests it is the canonical listing tool.

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

All Fruityvice 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