Nopaque TotalPath

List Test Configs

listTestConfigs

Read-onlyIdempotent

List the saved standard (scripted) test configs in your workspace: the step-by-step tests that dial a number, send keypresses or speech, and compare what is heard against an expected transcript. Returns every config with its name, description, phoneNumber, language, type and steps. Use when: the user names a test and you need its id, wants to know what standard tests exist, or you need to turn a configId from listTestRuns / aggregateTestRuns into a name. These are NOT mission-test configs: for those use listMissionTestConfigs. Cross-tool: for the runs of one of these tests use listTestRuns?configId=X, or listTestRuns?configName=X to find them by name without looking up the id. To count them use aggregateTestRuns with configId. Takes no parameters and is not paginated.

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": "listTestConfigs"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`_debug`	No	Debug fields echoed back by the handler (workspaceId, showAll, count) — not part of the stable contract.
`configs`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, but the description adds real context beyond them: the full result shape (name, description, phoneNumber, language, type, steps), the fact that every config is returned, and that the call is not paginated. That directly answers the practical concern of result volume for a zero-parameter enumerating call.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose and the resource definition before any routing advice, and each sentence carries distinct information. The cross-tool sentence is dense and packs three routes (listTestRuns by configId, by configName, aggregateTestRuns) but none of it is filler.

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?

Complete for a simple read-only list tool: purpose, scope boundary against the mission-test family, return fields, pagination behavior, and downstream routing are all present. An output schema exists, and the description still briefly previews returned fields without duplicating full return documentation.

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 semantics to explain; the description confirms this explicitly with "Takes no parameters," which prevents an agent from hunting for a filter argument. Baseline for a no-parameter tool is 4; there is no further parameter meaning that could be added.

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 verb and resource ("List the saved standard (scripted) test configs in your workspace") and immediately defines what those configs are — step-by-step tests that dial, send keypresses or speech, and compare audio to an expected transcript. It explicitly separates itself from listMissionTestConfigs, so an agent can disambiguate from siblings without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Provides an explicit "Use when:" block with three concrete triggers (need a test's id, want to know what standard tests exist, need to map a configId from listTestRuns/aggregateTestRuns back to a name), plus an explicit when-not ("These are NOT mission-test configs: for those use listMissionTestConfigs"). It goes further with cross-tool routing to listTestRuns by id or name and to aggregateTestRuns for counts.

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

All Nopaque TotalPath 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.