Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
lynxprompt-mcp

lynxprompt-mcp

by GeiserX
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Go
Remote

List my blueprints

list_blueprints
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve blueprint IDs and metadata for your LynxPrompt account, newest changes first, without content, to locate a blueprint for get, update, or delete. Use limit and offset to page results.

Instructions

List the blueprints owned by the user of LYNXPROMPT_TOKEN, newest change first, without their content. Use it to find a blueprint id (bp_...) for get_blueprint, update_blueprint or delete_blueprint. Paged: when has_more is true, call again with offset increased by limit.

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": "list_blueprints"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoBlueprints per page, 1 to 100. Default 50.
offsetNoHow many blueprints to skip. Default 0.
visibilityNoOnly blueprints with this visibility. Default all.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
totalNoItems matching, across all pages
offsetNo
has_moreNoTrue when another page exists: call again with offset + limit
blueprintsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.3.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, the description discloses the sort order, that content bodies are omitted, the auth-token-bound scope, and the has_more/offset+limit continuation rule. It stops short of stating what has_more/offset look like in the response, but the output schema presumably covers that.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with scope and ordering, then the id-resolution use case, then pagination mechanics. No sentence is redundant with another or with the schema.

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?

With 100% schema coverage and an output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs to page correctly and to know bodies are excluded. The remaining gap is the list-versus-search routing against the search_blueprints sibling, which is not addressed.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description adds value by tying offset and limit together operationally ('call again with offset increased by limit') and clarifying that visibility filtering applies to an ownership-scoped list. It does not explain the visibility enum values beyond the schema's own labels.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the blueprints'), the ownership scope ('owned by the user of LYNXPROMPT_TOKEN'), the sort order ('newest change first'), and an explicit exclusion ('without their content'). An agent knows exactly what comes back and in what order without opening the schema.

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?

Gives a concrete downstream purpose — resolve a blueprint id (bp_...) for get_blueprint, update_blueprint or delete_blueprint — and explains the pagination loop explicitly. It does not, however, say when to prefer the sibling search_blueprints over this listing when the user is looking for a blueprint by name, leaving that choice to inference.

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