flayr

List experiments

list_experiments

Read-onlyIdempotent

[read-only] A/B experiments. Content joins one by carrying the label experiment:<id> plus <compareKey>:<variant>. (Wraps GET /api/v2/experiments.)

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_experiments"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`brandId`	No	A brand id, or "all" (default: every profile you can see). A brand-bound key is always its own brand.
`allBrands`	No	true: every brand of the organizations you own or administer, plus your personal brands. Refused (403) for a plain member and for a brand-bound key.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 27, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / allBrands

Added value: +{
+  "description": "true: every brand of the organizations you own or administer, plus your personal brands. Refused (403) for a plain member and for a brand-bound key.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

First observedOct 21, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so '[read-only]' adds nothing. The genuinely useful addition is the explanation of how content attaches to experiments via `experiment:<id>` and `<compareKey>:<variant>` labels, plus the underlying REST endpoint, though pagination and result shape remain undisclosed.

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?

Three short segments with no filler; the read-only marker and endpoint wrapper are front-loaded and the label convention is compact. Slightly dense/jargon-heavy for a lead sentence, but nothing is wasted.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description says nothing about what a returned experiment looks like (fields, ids, counts) beyond the labeling scheme. For a simple zero-required-param read tool this is acceptable but leaves a clear gap for an agent that must interpret results.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the brandId and allBrands semantics (including the 403 refusal) are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no interpretation of either parameter, so baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description supplies the domain (A/B experiments) and the label convention, but never states the verb — 'list' is only inferable from the name. It does not distinguish this from get_experiment, get_experiment_results, or create_experiment, which an agent must guess among.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to call this instead of get_experiment (single experiment) or get_experiment_results (metrics), and no mention of prerequisites for brandId vs allBrands even though the schema notes a 403 case. The agent is left to infer routing from the tool name alone.

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

All flayr 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?