magicbell_list_channelsList delivery channels (in-app, email, push, SMS, etc.) with cursor pagination. Project API: GET /channels.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max items per page (cursor pagination). | |
| ending_before | No | Cursor: return items before this id (previous page). | |
| starting_after | No | Cursor: return items after this id (next page). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true; the description adds value by specifying the pagination method (cursor) and the API endpoint (GET /channels), which is consistent and informative.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is extremely concise with two sentences that front-load the main action and provide essential context without extra words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given full schema coverage and annotations, the description is complete for a list tool; missing output details are acceptable since no output schema is expected.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the description adds no extra parameter meaning. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description explicitly states that the tool lists delivery channels and provides examples (in-app, email, push, SMS), making the purpose clear and distinct from sibling list tools (e.g., events, broadcasts).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description mentions cursor pagination, implying usage for paginated listing, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. siblings or when not to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct resource and action (create, get, list, update) with no overlap. Verbs and nouns are clearly separated.
All tools follow a consistent 'magicbell_verb_noun' pattern, with verbs (create, get, list, update) and singular/plural usage appropriate to the operation.
13 tools cover core user management, broadcast/event observability, and configuration listing without being excessive or sparse for a notification platform.
Covers user CRUD (missing delete), broadcast/event/get/list, and configuration listing. While some write operations are absent, the set supports essential admin and observability tasks.