Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
lanhu-mcp-server

lanhu-mcp-server

by DC911360
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

lanhu_list_projects

List projects and folders in a Lanhu team by parent folder ID, returning their IDs and names.

Instructions

列出蓝湖团队下的所有项目/文件夹，返回 ID 和名称。parentId=0 表示根目录。

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": "lanhu_list_projects"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
parentIdNo父文件夹 ID，默认 0（根目录）

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.2.1

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses the return values (ID, name) and parameter behavior (parentId=0 root), but omits potential side effects, pagination, rate limits, or authentication requirements. Minimal disclosure for a read operation.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that front-load the action and result, with no redundant information. Every word serves a purpose.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate. It mentions the return fields (ID, name) and parameter meaning. However, it lacks details on response structure (e.g., array of objects), default behavior when no parentId is provided, and error scenarios. Could be improved but meets basic needs.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and includes a description of parentId. The tool description adds a clarifying note that parentId=0 means root directory, which is a useful addition. While schema already does the heavy lifting, this extra context slightly enhances understanding.

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 clearly states the verb '列出' (list) and resource '项目/文件夹' (projects/folders), and specifies the return fields (ID and name). It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools, but the action is distinct enough among the siblings.

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?

The description explains the meaning of the parentId parameter but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., lanhu_set_project for creation). There are no explicit context or exclusion hints.

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