Umtri

List change history of a ground

list_events

Returns the append-only change history (most recent first) of a ground: node/edge/api/bug create, update (with a field-level diff {from,to}), delete, and plan_commit. Each event carries the actor ("user:" for humans, "token:" for agents/automation), a summary label, and for updates a diff. Use it to answer "what changed, when, and by whom" — e.g. a bug's status transitions or a node's edits over time. Filter with entityType/entityId to get a single entity's timeline. Note: git commits recorded via record_commit live in a node's metadata.commits, not here.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "slug": "<slug>"
    },
    "name": "list_events"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`slug`	Yes	Ground slug.
`limit`	No	Max events to return (default 50, cap 200).
`before`	No	ISO timestamp — return events strictly older than this (keyset pagination).
`entityId`	No	Filter to one entity's timeline (usually paired with entityType).
`entityType`	No	Filter to one entity type.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and delivers rich detail: append-only, newest-first ordering, actor format (user:<id> vs token:<id>), field-level diff structure, and the explicit exclusion of record_commit events. This gives the agent a clear model of behavior and side-effect profile.

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 dense but every clause adds value: definition, event types, actor/diff format, use case, filtering advice, and an important exclusion. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and remains focused without redundancy.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must explain return values, and it does: each event carries actor, summary, and diff for updates. It also covers ordering, event coverage, filtering, and a key exclusion, making the tool's full behavior understandable without external schemas.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context by explaining the effect of entityType/entityId filtering ('get a single entity's timeline') and clarifying the semantics of the returned events, going beyond the schema's bare property descriptions.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Returns the append-only change history (most recent first) of a ground,' and enumerates exact event types (create, update, delete, plan_commit). This clearly differentiates it from siblings like list_bugs or list_projects, which serve different purposes.

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?

Explicitly states when to use the tool ('Use it to answer "what changed, when, and by whom"') and provides concrete examples (bug status transitions, node edits). It also gives an exclusion: git commits via record_commit live in node metadata, not here, which prevents mis-selection.

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

All Umtri 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.