Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ctxvault

ctxvault

by Filippo-Venturini
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

list_skills

Lists all available skills in a specified vault so you can see what exists before fetching one.

Instructions

List all available skills inside a specific vault. Use this to understand what skills are available before trying to fetch one.

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": {
      "vault_name": "<vault_name>"
    },
    "name": "list_skills"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
vault_nameYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
skillsYes
vault_nameYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.9.1

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It implies a read-only listing, but says nothing about behavior for an unknown vault (error vs empty list), ordering, pagination, or permission scoping. Since an output schema exists, return-value detail is reasonably left out, keeping this at a middling 3.

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 short sentences with zero filler: the scope constraint is front-loaded and the follow-up usage note comes second. Every clause earns its place.

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?

For a single-parameter list tool with an output schema covering return values, the description is sufficient to call it correctly. The main missing piece is how to obtain a valid vault name and what happens when the vault is unknown or empty.

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 description coverage is 0% and the only field is a bare 'Vault Name' title. The description ties the parameter to a vault scope, which adds a little meaning, but gives no format, naming convention, or discovery hint (e.g., use list_vaults to find valid names).

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?

States a specific verb+resource (list skills) plus a scope (a specific vault), which distinguishes it from siblings like list_docs, list_entities, and list_vaults by resource type. It does not explicitly name those siblings, so it falls just short of a 5.

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?

"Use this to understand what skills are available before trying to fetch one" gives clear when-to-use guidance and implicitly routes to read_skill as the follow-up fetch tool. There are no explicit exclusions or when-not-to-use conditions, which is the only gap.

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