Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
YAPI MCP Server

YAPI MCP Server

by AlwaysLoveme
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

List YAPI Interfaces

yapi_list_interfaces

List paginated API interfaces from a YAPI project, returning ID, title, path, method, and status for each interface.

Instructions

List interfaces in a project with pagination. Returns basic info (ID, title, path, method, status) for each interface.

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_list_interfaces"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYesThe YAPI project ID
pageNoPage number (default: 1)
limitNoItems per page, max 100 (default: 20)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.0.2

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, description bears full burden. It states it returns basic info but does not disclose behavioral traits like read-only nature, authentication needs, error behavior, or pagination behavior (e.g., max pages, order).

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?

Two concise, front-loaded sentences. No wasted words.

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 no output schema and 3 simple params, description covers basic return info. Lacks mention of how to obtain project_id (e.g., from yapi_get_project) and default sort order, but is largely sufficient for a listing 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 covers all parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). Description adds context about return fields but does not meaningfully enhance parameter understanding beyond schema.

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?

Description clearly states verb (List), resource (interfaces in a project), and key features (pagination). It distinguishes from siblings like yapi_get_interface (single interface) and yapi_list_by_category (by category).

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 (e.g., yapi_get_interface for a single interface, yapi_list_by_category for categorized listing). No exclusions or prerequisites mentioned.

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