Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Fizzy MCP Server

Fizzy MCP Server

by Fabric-Pro
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

List Accounts

fizzy_get_accounts
Read-only

Retrieve all Fizzy accounts accessible to the current user, with slugs, names, and access levels. Use this to identify available accounts before managing boards, cards, or tasks.

Instructions

Get all Fizzy accounts accessible to the current user. Returns account details including slugs, names, and access levels.

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": "fizzy_get_accounts"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds value by revealing output contents (slugs, names, access levels) and current-user scoping, which is useful because no output schema exists.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the action and scope before stating return details, with no wasted words.

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 zero-parameter read-only listing tool with annotations covering safety, the description fully covers what the agent needs: what it returns, for whom, and what fields are included.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so there is no parameter meaning for the description to add; this matches the baseline for parameterless tools.

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 specifies the verb 'Get all' and a concrete resource (Fizzy accounts accessible to the current user), and enumerates returned fields (slugs, names, access levels), making it distinct from sibling account/board/user tools.

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?

The phrase 'accessible to the current user' gives clear scoping for when to call this tool, and the resource name 'accounts' differentiates it from identity, board, card, and user tools. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but none are necessary for this simple list.

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