Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

saagarpatel.dev Portfolio

by io.github.saagpatel
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Show project gallery

show_project_gallery
Read-only

Show the curated public projects as a gallery of cards: name, category, stack, lifecycle, last-active date, test/CI signals, and the public repository link, with archive-wide totals. Hosts that support MCP Apps render it as an interactive gallery; others get the same data as JSON.

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": "show_project_gallery"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statusNoOnly projects with this status, e.g. "active" or "stale"
lifecycleNoOnly projects in this lifecycle, e.g. "active", "dormant" or "manual-only"; "none" for projects with no lifecycle

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered; the description adds the genuinely useful disclosure that MCP-App hosts render an interactive gallery while other hosts receive equivalent JSON, which tells the agent the response shape is host-dependent. It does not mention result limits, pagination, or empty-result behavior.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, then the field inventory, then the host-rendering caveat. Every clause carries information; nothing is restated from the title or schema.

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 two-optional-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers what is returned, the two render modes, and the presence of aggregate totals — enough for correct invocation. It stops short of describing filter composition or result-size behavior, which an agent may still need to guess.

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% and both filters (status, lifecycle) are documented in the schema with examples, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description's mention of lifecycle and last-active date in the card fields does not add filtering semantics beyond what the schema already states.

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?

"Show the curated public projects as a gallery of cards" gives a concrete verb, resource, and presentation mode, then enumerates exactly what each card contains (name, category, stack, lifecycle, last-active, test/CI signals, repo link) plus archive-wide totals. It is clearly not a flat listing like list_projects, but it never names a sibling to make the distinction explicit.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the visual/browsable presentation of curated public projects. There is no statement of when to prefer it over list_projects or show_project_timeline, no note on how the two optional filters interact, and no exclusions.

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

All saagarpatel.dev Portfolio 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