get-tag-listRetrieve the complete list of GreyNoise tags with names and slugs from a cached JSON endpoint, enabling tag-based threat intelligence analysis and filtering.
Retrieve the complete list of GreyNoise tags (from v3/tags, cached 1h). Returns JSON with count and each tag's name and slug. Takes no parameters.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tags | Yes | ||
| count | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.5.5v0.5.3v0.4.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations, the description discloses the data source (v3/tags) and a 1-hour cache window, which is real behavioral context an agent needs for freshness decisions. It does not cover rate limits or error behavior, but the annotations already establish the safety profile.
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?
Three short sentences, all front-loaded: purpose first, then return shape, then the no-parameter note. No filler or repeated information.
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?
For a parameterless read with an output schema, this is essentially complete; the source and cache note are useful extras. The only gap is routing guidance to search-tags when a caller actually wants a filtered subset rather than the whole catalog.
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?
Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The explicit 'Takes no parameters' line is redundant with the empty schema but harmlessly confirms there is nothing to supply.
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?
States a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('complete list of GreyNoise tags') and names the backing endpoint (v3/tags), so the agent knows exactly what data comes back. The word 'complete' implicitly separates it from filtered siblings like search-tags, but it never names that sibling explicitly.
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?
Usage is only implied: fetch this when you need the full tag catalog. There is no explicit when-to-use, no exclusion, and no pointer to search-tags or get-tag-details for filtered or single-tag lookups, which are present among the siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.