list_biases
List the 22-bias catalogue, optionally filtered by family.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| family | No |
irrational
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, and the description only states the tool lists biases. It does not disclose order, pagination, limits, or any side effects. The description carries the full burden for behavioral transparency but falls short.
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?
The description is a single concise sentence with no filler. It quickly conveys the core function and the only parameter.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness2/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
No output schema is provided, and the description does not specify what fields or structure the list returns. For a listing tool, this is a significant gap, as the agent needs to know what to expect.
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 must compensate. It mentions the optional family filter, but does not explain the meaning of each family enum value beyond the enum labels themselves, which are self-explanatory. Minimal added value.
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?
The description clearly states the tool lists the 22-bias catalogue with optional filtering by family. This distinguishes it from siblings 'get_bias' (single bias retrieval) and 'analyze_decision' (analysis function).
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?
No explicit when-to-use or alternative guidance is provided. However, the description implies it is for browsing the full catalogue, while 'get_bias' likely targets a specific bias. This is intuitive but not stated.
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.
TDQS
A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool has a distinct purpose: analyzing decisions, retrieving a bias by ID, and listing biases. There is no overlap or ambiguity.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (analyze_decision, get_bias, list_biases), making the naming predictable and clear.
Tool Count5/5
With 3 tools, the server is well-scoped for its domain of bias analysis. The count is neither too sparse nor excessive.
Completeness4/5
The tool surface covers the core operations: listing biases, retrieving details, and analyzing decisions. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no tool to search or filter more granularly), but the set is sufficient for the intended use.