Skip to main content
Glama

Lochless

by io.lochless
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Browse documents

browse_documents
Read-only

List your own documents (your knowledge base) by date, newest first unless order=asc. No query needed. Each result has its document id, connection id, title, date, metadata and the start of its text. Narrow with from/to (the document's timestamp) and metadata (exact match; a list = any of). Returns results, total_results and next_cursor: pass it back as cursor for the next page. Free: browsing never spends your balance.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toNoOnly documents whose timestamp is before this: an ISO 8601 date-time, or a YYYY-MM-DD date (through its end, UTC).
fromNoOnly documents whose timestamp is at or after this: an ISO 8601 date-time, or a YYYY-MM-DD date (from its start, UTC).
limitNoResults per page, default 50, up to 100.
orderNodesc (default) = newest first; asc = oldest first.
cursorNonext_cursor from the previous page of this same call, to get the next page.
metadataNoExact metadata matches, e.g. {"client": "acme"}. A list matches any of its values.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / from / anyOf
      Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "format": "date-time",
-    "pattern": "^(?:(?:\\d\\d[2468][048]|\\d\\d[13579][26]|\\d\\d0[48]|[02468][048]00|[13579][26]00)-02-29|\\d{4}-(?:(?:0[13578]|1[02])-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|3[01])|(?:0[469]|11)-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|30)|(?:02)-(?:0[1-9]|1\\d|2[0-8])))T(?:(?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d(?::[0-5]\\d(?:\\.\\d+)?)?(?:Z|([+-](?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d)))$",
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "pattern": "^\\d{4}-\\d{2}-\\d{2}$",
-    "type": "string"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "format": "date-time",
+    "pattern": "^(?:(?:\\d\\d[2468][048]|\\d\\d[13579][26]|\\d\\d0[48]|[02468][048]00|[13579][26]00)-02-29|\\d{4}-(?:(?:0[13578]|1[02])-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|3[01])|(?:0[469]|11)-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|30)|(?:02)-(?:0[1-9]|1\\d|2[0-8])))T(?:(?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d:[0-5]\\d(?:\\.\\d+)?(?:Z|([+-](?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d)))$",
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "pattern": "^\\d{4}-\\d{2}-\\d{2}$",
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / to / anyOf
      Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "format": "date-time",
-    "pattern": "^(?:(?:\\d\\d[2468][048]|\\d\\d[13579][26]|\\d\\d0[48]|[02468][048]00|[13579][26]00)-02-29|\\d{4}-(?:(?:0[13578]|1[02])-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|3[01])|(?:0[469]|11)-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|30)|(?:02)-(?:0[1-9]|1\\d|2[0-8])))T(?:(?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d(?::[0-5]\\d(?:\\.\\d+)?)?(?:Z|([+-](?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d)))$",
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "pattern": "^\\d{4}-\\d{2}-\\d{2}$",
-    "type": "string"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "format": "date-time",
+    "pattern": "^(?:(?:\\d\\d[2468][048]|\\d\\d[13579][26]|\\d\\d0[48]|[02468][048]00|[13579][26]00)-02-29|\\d{4}-(?:(?:0[13578]|1[02])-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|3[01])|(?:0[469]|11)-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|30)|(?:02)-(?:0[1-9]|1\\d|2[0-8])))T(?:(?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d:[0-5]\\d(?:\\.\\d+)?(?:Z|([+-](?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d)))$",
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "pattern": "^\\d{4}-\\d{2}-\\d{2}$",
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+]
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/destructive=false and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds the pieces that aren't in annotations: default result shape (id, connection id, title, date, metadata, text prefix), pagination contract (results, total_results, next_cursor), and the zero-cost guarantee. Missing only edge behavior such as what happens when no documents exist.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and default sort, then ordering, filters, result shape, pagination and cost in that sequence. Every sentence carries a distinct fact; none restates the name or title.

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?

For a 6-parameter, no-required-args, nested-metadata list tool with no output schema, the description covers ordering, timestamp filtering, metadata matching semantics, result fields, pagination and cost. An agent has everything needed to call it and to handle the response without guessing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, which sets the baseline at 3, but the description earns extra credit by tying the parameters together operationally: from/to filter on 'the document's timestamp', metadata is exact-match with list=any-of, and next_cursor must be fed back as cursor. It reinforces rather than repeats, and adds the cursor round-trip that a per-parameter schema cannot express.

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 your own documents ... by date') with the default ordering baked into the first clause. The 'No query needed' + 'Free' framing implicitly separates it from search_documents, but no sibling is named, so the differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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 a clear selecting condition ('No query needed') and a cost-based reason to prefer it ('browsing never spends your balance'), which lets an agent route here when it has no query and wants to avoid spend. It stops short of explicitly naming search_documents or ask_documents as the alternative for query-driven retrieval.

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

All Lochless 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