Skip to main content
Glama

WAI Quantum job service

List the engine's components

list_components
Read-only

Every component the service plans, runs, compiles and converts through: the simulation methods, the compiler passes, the noise channels and the program formats, each with its version, its origin and the BLAKE3 digest of its descriptor, which is the identity a result is sealed with. The service runs the built-ins alone and never loads a component from a request.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_components"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

readOnlyHint already covers the safety profile, and the description adds genuinely new behavior: the service runs built-ins alone and never loads a component from a request, so the agent knows the list is static and not influenced by input. It also explains the BLAKE3 digest as the sealing identity, useful context for interpreting results.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the resource and its categories. The first sentence is a long chained clause, but every element (version, origin, digest) carries meaning for an agent that needs identity data.

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?

Output schema exists, so return structure needn't be described, and readOnlyHint covers mutation risk. The description supplies the remaining relevant context — full enumeration of component kinds and the built-ins-only constraint — leaving nothing an agent needs before calling.

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?

Zero parameters, so there is no schema semantics to add beyond what the empty object already conveys. Baseline 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?

Names a specific resource (components) and enumerates the concrete categories it covers: simulation methods, compiler passes, noise channels and program formats. That enumeration clearly separates it from siblings like list_targets or quantum_service_info without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied — an agent infers it should call this to discover available components and their digests. There is no explicit 'use this when…' statement and no named alternative for the adjacent discovery needs (targets, service info).

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.

Resources