list_schemasList saved account schemas by ID and name, newest first, so you can reuse an existing schema instead of creating a new one.
List the account's saved schemas (id and name), newest first, to reuse one instead of creating a new one. Free.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| offset | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered, and the description adds genuine value on top: default ordering (newest first), the returned fields (id and name), and a cost note. The main omission is pagination behavior, which matters for an offset/limit list.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single sentence with the resource, return fields, ordering, and purpose all front-loaded. Every clause earns its place and nothing is padded.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With annotations covering the safety profile and no output schema needed beyond the stated id/name fields, the core is complete. However, for a paginated list tool with two fully undocumented parameters, the definition leaves the agent without enough to page correctly through results.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so both parameters (limit and offset) carry no documented meaning anywhere. The description compensates only indirectly with 'newest first', implying an ordering that offset paginates over, but never explains the limit defaults, maximums, or how offset interacts with that ordering.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description gives a specific verb and resource ('List the account's saved schemas') and scopes the payload to id and name, so the agent knows exactly what comes back. It distinguishes itself from create_schema implicitly via 'instead of creating a new one', though it never names the sibling tool directly.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicit usage context is provided: use this to reuse an existing schema rather than creating a new one. It also notes the call is free, which is a useful decision signal. It stops short of stating when this tool is NOT appropriate or naming alternatives by tool name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.