Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Agent Wikis

by io.github.tonbistudio
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List agent tools

list_agent_tools
Read-onlyIdempotent

List the command-line tools that ship with the specialist agents (complete agents built for one job, e.g. marketing, video generation, local LLMs). Each entry has a summary, the specialists it comes from, and access: "pro" tools are read-only (they inspect and report, never change anything) and read_agent_tool serves their files; "download" tools are bigger or change things (start runs, stop services, spend money), so read_agent_tool gives a short-lived download link for the whole tool instead. Both need Pro. readable says whether YOU can get it with your current access. Pass query to filter by keywords.

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": "list_agent_tools"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryNoOptional keywords, matched against the name, summary and specialist.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and non-destructive, and the description adds substantial context beyond them: the Pro entitlement requirement, the meaning of the `access` field, the fact that download-category tools can start runs, stop services and spend money, and that the returned link is short-lived. That is exactly the kind of consequence and prerequisite disclosure the annotations cannot carry.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then the field descriptions, then the access semantics and the filter hint — a logical progression with no filler. It is dense, though, packing several ideas into long clauses, and the Pro requirement appears mid-stream rather than up front.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must describe the return shape, and it does: each entry has a summary, its `specialists`, an `access` classification, and a `readable` flag reflecting the caller's entitlement. Combined with the entitlement and download-behavior notes, nothing an agent needs to call this correctly and interpret the result is missing.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already explains that `query` matches name, summary and specialist. The description's 'Pass `query` to filter by keywords' adds no syntax, matching behavior or semantics beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the command-line tools that ship with the specialist agents') and immediately clarifies what a specialist agent is with concrete examples (marketing, video generation, local LLMs). It also names the sibling read_agent_tool and what that tool does with each category, so an agent can separate listing from retrieval without opening either schema.

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?

Gives clear follow-up routing: pro tools are read via read_agent_tool serving files, download tools yield a short-lived download link, and both require Pro. What's missing is an explicit statement of when to call this tool versus siblings like search or list_skills, and no exclusion conditions are given, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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

All Agent Wikis 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