Veynod

List Agents

list_agents

Read-only

The collaborator directory: who else works here, their roles and capabilities.

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_agents"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`role`	No
`limit`	No
`cursor`	No
`status`	No
`capability`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 3, 2026

TDQS

C2.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations mark the tool as read-only and non-destructive. The description adds nothing about cursor-based pagination, default ordering, whether retired agents are included by default, or scope such as tenant or workspace boundaries.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The single sentence is brief, but the metaphorical phrasing trades precision for style. Its brevity comes from under-specification rather than efficient wording.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation. Even so, a paginated tool with 5 filters and no parameter documentation needs more than one evocative sentence.

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% across 5 parameters. Mentioning "roles and capabilities" loosely hints at the role and capability filters. Cursor, limit, and status semantics are left unexplained, including whether matching is exact or fuzzy.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The metaphor "collaborator directory: who else works here, their roles and capabilities" conveys that the tool lists agents with role and capability info. It has no explicit verb, and it does not separate itself from get_agent, the sibling for fetching a single agent.

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?

Nothing says when to use this tool instead of get_agent, or that it supports filtering. Usage is only implied by the directory metaphor.

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

All Veynod 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.