QuestionPunk

Survey List

survey_list

Read-onlyIdempotent

Find surveys. Use it to turn a survey the user names into a surveyId: pass a word from its title as search. Returns [counts, surveys, labels]: surveys is this page (up to 35; ask for the next page when it is full); labels names the counts ({ counts: { allSurveys, updatedInLast3Days, starred }, page, pageSize }), which cover every survey you can access, not only this search. If several surveys match, ask the user which one.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "survey_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No	Page number (starts at 1)
`method`	No	Filter by study method
`search`	No	Text to find in survey titles, e.g. a word the user used for the survey
`sortBy`	No	Sort field
`status`	No	Filter by status
`teamId`	No	Filter by team ID
`category`	No	Filter by category
`folderId`	No	Filter by folder ID
`sortOrder`	No	Sort order

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: page size caps at 35, you should request the next page when a page is full, and the returned counts cover every accessible survey rather than only the current search. The labels/counts phrasing is dense but the important nuance (counts are not scoped to the search) is disclosed.

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?

The purpose is front-loaded in two words, then the resolution workflow, then the return-shape contract. Every sentence carries information, though the inline object notation for labels is harder to parse than a plain sentence would be.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a zero-required-parameter listing tool with an output schema and full schema coverage, the main gaps an agent would face are pagination behavior and disambiguation, and both are addressed. Explaining the returned tuple partly duplicates the output schema, but the count-scoping caveat is genuinely needed context.

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%, so every one of the nine parameters is already documented in the schema. The only parameter the description touches is search, and it essentially restates the schema's own example ("a word from its title"). Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema carries the load.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"Find surveys" plus the explicit framing "turn a survey the user names into a surveyId" gives a concrete verb, resource and resolution use case. That implicitly separates it from survey_get (fetch by known id), but no sibling is named, so the differentiation is left to inference.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It clearly states the triggering condition (a user refers to a survey by name) and the mechanism (pass a title word as search). It also gives a follow-up rule for ambiguity: "If several surveys match, ask the user which one." It does not say when to prefer alternatives such as listing without a search term or calling survey_get directly.

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

All QuestionPunk 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?