Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Nopaque TotalPath

by uk.co.nopaque
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List Alert Destinations

listNotificationDestinations
Read-onlyIdempotent

List the email addresses your workspace's alert rules can send to: each has an id, address, label and status (pending until the address owner clicks the link in the verification email, then verified). An alert is only sent to a verified address. Takes no parameters. Use when: the user asks where alerts go, or why an address gets nothing. Read-only. Needs notifications:read. Only a person signed in to the nopaque web app can call this; an API key is refused.

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": "listNotificationDestinations"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countYes
destinationsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description adds real context beyond annotations: the pending/verified lifecycle, the rule that unverified addresses receive nothing, the required notifications:read scope, and the constraint that only a signed-in web-app user can call it while API keys are refused. However, 'Read-only' merely restates readOnlyHint=true, and since annotations already declare the safety profile, the incremental value lands at a solid 3 rather than higher.

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?

Front-loads what is listed and what each record contains, then the verification semantics, then usage, then auth. Every sentence earns its place; the only near-redundancy is 'Takes no parameters,' which cheaply forecloses a common misread.

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?

An output schema exists, so return shape needs no explanation, and the description still supplies the field-level meaning (status pending vs verified) plus the auth constraint that no annotation or schema conveys. For a zero-parameter read tool this is complete.

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?

With zero parameters the baseline is 4, and the description correctly confirms 'Takes no parameters,' removing any doubt about hidden filtering options. No further parameter detail is possible or needed.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb and resource ('List the email addresses your workspace's alert rules can send to') and enumerates the returned fields (id, address, label, status). It implicitly separates itself from listAlertRules by being about destinations rather than rules, but it never names a sibling explicitly, so sibling differentiation is left to inference.

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?

Provides explicit trigger conditions: 'Use when: the user asks where alerts go, or why an address gets nothing.' That is clear when-to-use guidance covering the two realistic intents, though it offers no when-not-to-use case or named alternative.

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

All Nopaque TotalPath toolsInspect
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