Metadata MCP Connector

List All Budget Groups

list_budget_groups

Read-only

Browse and list all available budget groups in the Metadata platform with customizable sorting.

            KEYWORDS: budget, group, list, all, browse, spending, allocation, optimization, overview

            **DIFFERENCE FROM get_budget_group:**
            - get_budget_group: Searches for ONE specific group BY NAME (requires group name input)
            - list_budget_groups: Returns ALL groups at once (supports flexible sorting)

            USE THIS TOOL WHEN THE USER ASKS:
            - "Show me all budget groups" or "List all budget groups"
            - "What budget groups do we have?"
            - "Display all available groups"
            - "Show groups sorted by [metric]"
            - "Which groups have the highest budget?"
            - "Show groups by leads generated"
            - "List groups sorted by CPL"
            - "Order groups by spending"

            DO NOT USE if the user:
            - Asks for details about a SPECIFIC group by name → use get_budget_group instead
            - Wants to find a group by name → use get_budget_group instead
            - Says "Find the [specific name] group" → use get_budget_group instead

            SORTING OPTIONS:
            You can sort by any of these fields (default: totalActiveExperiments descending):
            - totalActiveExperiments, monthlyCap, averageDailyBudgetPerExperiment
            - spent, totalBudget, endDate, startDate, leads, cpl

            SORT ORDER:
            - asc: Ascending order (lowest to highest, oldest to newest)
            - desc: Descending order (highest to lowest, newest to oldest) [DEFAULT]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No	Page number for pagination (0-based). Default: 0
`size`	No	Number of results per page. Default: 10
`sort_by`	No	Field to sort budget groups by. Default: totalActiveExperiments
`sort_order`	No	Sort order - 'asc' (ascending) or 'desc' (descending). Default: desc

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedSep 16, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavior about sorting and returning all groups, but the claim 'Returns ALL groups at once' conflicts with the paginated page/size parameters, and pagination behavior is not disclosed. This is a meaningful transparency gap.

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?

The description is long but well-organized with clear sections, examples, and exclusions. The front-loaded summary and explicit formatting make it scannable, though the keyword block and repeated examples add some redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description covers purpose, selection criteria, and sorting well, and annotations cover safety. However, the pagination mismatch is unresolved: the text says all groups are returned 'at once' while the schema indicates paged results, and no output/return behavior is described. Since there is no output schema, this leaves an agent uncertain about the actual response shape.

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%, and the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds extra value by enumerating valid sort fields, explaining asc/desc semantics, and stating defaults in user-facing terms, going beyond what the schema provides.

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 that the tool lists all budget groups with customizable sorting, using a specific verb and resource. It explicitly contrasts itself with get_budget_group, so an agent can immediately distinguish it from the closest sibling tool.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides explicit 'USE THIS TOOL WHEN' examples, including natural-language user requests, and a 'DO NOT USE' section that names the alternative tool for specific group lookup. This gives unambiguous guidance for tool selection.

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

All Metadata MCP Connector 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.

Resources

Need Help?