Skip to main content
Glama

LexQ

by io.lexq.mcp
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List Simulations

lexq_simulation_list
Read-only

List simulation history with optional filters.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toNoEnd date, yyyy-MM-dd, a whole calendar day in the organization time zone (tenantTimezone in whoami), not UTC. Inclusive: the whole day counts.
fromNoStart date, yyyy-MM-dd, a whole calendar day in the organization time zone (tenantTimezone in whoami), not UTC. Inclusive.
pageNoPage number
sizeNoPage size
statusNoFilter by status

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / from / description
      Previous value: -"Start date (yyyy-MM-dd)"New value: +"Start date, yyyy-MM-dd, a whole calendar day in the organization time zone (tenantTimezone in whoami), not UTC. Inclusive."
    • changedInput schema / properties / to / description
      Previous value: -"End date (yyyy-MM-dd)"New value: +"End date, yyyy-MM-dd, a whole calendar day in the organization time zone (tenantTimezone in whoami), not UTC. Inclusive: the whole day counts."
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / page / maximum
      Added value: +9007199254740991
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / status / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "PENDING",
-  "RUNNING",
-  "COMPLETED",
-  "FAILED",
-  "CANCELLED"
-]New value: +[
+  "PENDING",
+  "RUNNING",
+  "COMPLETED",
+  "FAILED",
+  "CANCELED"
+]
  4. First observed

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

readOnlyHint=true already declares this is a safe read. The description adds nothing beyond that — no note on pagination behavior despite page/size params, no mention of result ordering or whether canceled/failed runs are included. Minimal added value.

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, but it is arguably under-specified rather than truly concise given the tool's filter and pagination surface.

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 exists, so the description should indicate what a simulation-history entry looks like or how results are ordered/paged, and it does not. For a filterable list tool with pagination, this leaves real gaps.

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%, with from/to, page, size, and status all documented in detail (timezone semantics, inclusivity, enum values). The description's generic 'optional filters' adds no meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 simulation history'), so the agent knows the operation type. However, it does not differentiate from close siblings like lexq_simulation_status or lexq_simulation_export, which also surface simulation data.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus lexq_simulation_status or lexq_history_list. The phrase 'optional filters' implies a query tool but gives no conditions, prerequisites, or alternatives.

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

All LexQ toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources