Skip to main content
Glama

ChartAnt

List chart history

list_chart_versions
Read-onlyIdempotent

List the saved earlier versions of a living chart, newest first, as JSON (version number, date, image or page link). Use it before restore_chart_version. Needs a connection signed in to a free account (connector URL ending in /mcp/account).

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "list_chart_versions"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe chart id from create_living_chart or list_my_charts.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, yet the description still adds real context: newest-first ordering, what each entry contains, and an auth constraint (free account, connector URL ending in /mcp/account). It does not mention pagination or how many versions are returned.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and result, then the workflow hint and prerequisite. No filler wording.

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 single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, ordering, return contents, sibling relationship, and auth requirements, which is everything an agent needs to call it correctly.

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 coverage is 100% and the single 'id' parameter already documents its origin (create_living_chart or list_my_charts). The description adds nothing about the id beyond the framing that it identifies a 'living chart', so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the saved earlier versions of a living chart') plus ordering ('newest first') and return shape ('version number, date, image or page link'), which separates it from sibling list_my_charts and the generate_* tools.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent into a workflow ('Use it before restore_chart_version') and states the connection prerequisite. It does not spell out when-not to use it, but for a read-only history lookup the ambiguity is minimal.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.