Skip to main content
Glama

List benchmark runs

benchmarks_list
Read-onlyIdempotent

List benchmark suites and runs, optionally filtered to a since_version cutoff.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "sinceVersion": "<sinceVersion>"
    },
    "name": "benchmarks_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sinceVersionYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and closed-world, so safety behavior is fully covered by structured data. The description adds the result shape ('suites and runs') and a version-scoping notion, but nothing about pagination, ordering, or output format. Note the description calls the cutoff 'optional' while the schema marks sinceVersion as required – a description/schema inconsistency, though not an annotation contradiction.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the filtered scope is stated efficiently. Slightly under-specified rather than verbose, which is the better failure mode.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple list tool with strong annotations, the description is nearly sufficient, but it omits the sinceVersion format and contradicts the schema on whether that parameter is required. An agent could still call it, but might guess the version format wrong.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the burden of explaining sinceVersion, and it only says 'since_version cutoff' with no format (semver? date? release tag?) or default behavior. This is the main gap in an otherwise simple one-parameter tool.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'List benchmark suites and runs', which is distinct from siblings like benchmark_run and benchmarks_compare. It doesn't explicitly name an alternative, but the purpose is unambiguous on its own.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this versus benchmarks_for_model, benchmarks_compare, or benchmark_run, even though those siblings clearly overlap. The only usage signal is the optional version filter, which is left implicit.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.