Skip to main content
Glama

list_published_paths

Read-onlyIdempotent

List all published learning paths for a domain, showing URLs and visibility. Determine what learners actually see, including hidden catalog status and free offers, to answer path-related questions.

Instructions

List the paths published on one domain - what learners can actually see.

    `domain_name` is the HOSTNAME, not an id: `training.example.org`. v2's
    `list_domains` gives the hostnames.

    This is the tool for almost any real question about a path, because a path with
    no publication is invisible. A path published to two domains appears twice here,
    once per domain, with its own URL and visibility each time.

    `hidden` keeps it off the catalog while leaving the URL reachable - which is not
    the same as unpublished. `offer` is null when the path is free.

    Requires `CSA_SKILLJAR_V1_API_KEY`, a separate credential from the v2 client.
    

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNo
page_sizeNo
domain_nameYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
noteYes
pageNo
rowsYes
totalNo
has_moreNo
next_pageNo
Install Server

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only and idempotent, but the description adds valuable non-obvious behavior: a path published to two domains appears twice, hidden means reachable but not on the catalog, offer is null for free paths, and a separate credential is required. This is exactly the contextual behavior beyond annotations that helps an agent avoid mistakes.

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?

The description is well-structured and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence contributes a distinct useful fact: hostname semantics, why this tool matters, duplicate publication behavior, hidden vs unpublished, offer null, and credential requirements. There is no filler or redundancy.

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?

For a read-only list endpoint with an output schema, the description covers the important edge cases and pitfalls an agent would face: domain_name format, duplicate rows per domain, hidden semantics, free offer behavior, and the separate API key requirement. Nothing critical is missing for correct invocation and interpretation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description carries the burden for parameters. It strongly clarifies domain_name: it is a hostname, not an id, with an example and a pointer to list_domains. However, page and page_size receive no added semantics beyond their names and schema types, so parameter coverage is incomplete.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List the paths published on one domain - what learners can actually see.' It clearly distinguishes published paths from unpublished ones, even though it doesn't explicitly name list_paths as the sibling alternative. Scope is unmistakable, but direct sibling differentiation is missing.

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?

It says 'This is the tool for almost any real question about a path' and explains why unpublished paths are invisible, providing strong when-to-use guidance. It also tells the caller that v2's list_domains provides the needed hostnames. It doesn't spell out when to prefer list_paths or other path-related tools, so it stops short of a 5.

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

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/CloudSecurityAlliance/csa-skilljar'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server