list_http_statusesList HTTP status codes, optionally filtered to a class (1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 for 1xx…5xx).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| class | No | Optional leading digit 1-5 to filter (e.g. 4 for 4xx). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "class": 4
+ },
+ {}
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the filtering behavior but doesn't disclose pagination, ordering, or return format. With annotations covering safety, the contribution is adequate but minimal.
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?
Single sentence, front-loaded with the core action, and zero wasted words. It efficiently communicates the purpose and optional filtering.
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?
Given the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description is sufficient. It covers the core functionality and optional filter without requiring additional details.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100% and includes examples and a clear description for the 'class' parameter. The tool description reiterates the filter option but adds no new semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides.
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 clearly states the tool lists HTTP status codes and specifies an optional filter by class (1-5). This verb+resource description is specific and distinguishes it from siblings like 'http_status'.
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?
No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'http_status'. The description implies it's for browsing codes with optional filtering, but there is no mention of exclusions or when not to use it.
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 tools have distinct purposes, but ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, and ask_pipeworx_grounded are very similar, causing potential confusion. The memory tools (remember/recall/forget) are separate, but the overall set is diverse enough that agents can typically distinguish them.
Tool names use a mix of camelCase (ask_pipeworx, entity_profile, generate_llms_txt) and snake_case (http_status, list_http_statuses, list_subscriptions), with no consistent verb_noun pattern. Some names are descriptive, but the lack of a unified convention hurts predictability.
33 tools is high for a server named 'Httpstatus' that only has two HTTP-related tools. The large number spans data retrieval, memory, subscriptions, prediction markets, and more, making the server feel bloated and unfocused.
The server covers many domains but each is incomplete. HTTP status has lookup and list but no lifecycle. Memory tools are basic. Data retrieval is extensive but not exhaustive for any single domain. It's a broad but shallow collection.