Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
YAPI MCP Server

YAPI MCP Server

by AlwaysLoveme
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Get Full Interface Menu

yapi_get_full_menu

Retrieve all API interfaces organized by category for a given project. Provides the full category-to-interface hierarchy for documentation inspection.

Instructions

Get all interfaces grouped by category for a project. Returns the complete category-to-interface hierarchy. Warning: may return large payloads for big projects.

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": {
      "project_id": "<project_id>"
    },
    "name": "yapi_get_full_menu"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYesThe YAPI project ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.0.2

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description provides a warning about potentially large payloads, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or mention any authentication requirements.

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 sentences: purpose, output description, and a warning. All sentences are relevant and concise, though the structure could be slightly more front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given a single parameter and no output schema, the description is fairly complete: it states the action, output hierarchy, and a performance warning. Missing details like pagination or sorting, but acceptable for this tool.

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% for project_id, and the description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides ('The YAPI project ID'). Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Describes the tool's function clearly: 'Get all interfaces grouped by category for a project.' Specifies the output as 'complete category-to-interface hierarchy,' distinguishing it from siblings like yapi_get_cat_menu.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like yapi_get_cat_menu or yapi_list_by_category. The warning about large payloads is helpful but does not explicitly compare with siblings.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools