Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Heartran

Kanka MCP Server

by Heartran
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

list_journals

Lists journals in a Kanka campaign, with pagination and entry filters to control response size and return only records with empty or filled entries.

Instructions

List journals. Use per_page to keep responses small enough to be returned whole, and entry_filter to return only records whose entry is empty or filled.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoPage number (default 1).
entriesNoInclude full entry/entry_parsed text (default true). Set false to omit the long entry fields, shrink the response, and get a has_entry boolean per record instead.
per_pageNoRecords per page, 1-100. Enforced by this server, so it holds even when the Kanka API returns a different page size. Omit to return the API's own page untouched; when set (or when entry_filter is used) the default is 25 with entries, 100 without.
campaignIdYes
entry_filterNoKeep only records with an empty entry ('empty'), only records with text ('filled'), or all of them ('all', default). Filtering is applied across the whole collection, not just one API page.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv2.2.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / entries
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Include full entry/entry_parsed text (default true). Set false to omit the long entry fields, shrink the response, and get a has_entry boolean per record instead.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / entry_filter
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Keep only records with an empty entry ('empty'), only records with text ('filled'), or all of them ('all', default). Filtering is applied across the whole collection, not just one API page.",
+  "enum": [
+    "all",
+    "empty",
+    "filled"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / page / description
      Added value: +"Page number (default 1)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / per_page
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Records per page, 1-100. Enforced by this server, so it holds even when the Kanka API returns a different page size. Omit to return the API's own page untouched; when set (or when entry_filter is used) the default is 25 with entries, 100 without.",
+  "maximum": 100,
+  "minimum": 1,
+  "type": "number"
+}
  2. First observedv2.1.1

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
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 behavioral burden. It does disclose one genuinely useful trait beyond the schema — that per_page keeps responses "small enough to be returned whole," hinting at a truncation/size constraint. It says nothing about pagination totals, ordering, permissions, or what the returned records contain, so the disclosure is partial.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two tight sentences with the operation front-loaded and no filler. Minor redundancy in re-explaining entry_filter's enum values, which the schema already enumerates.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Five parameters, no output schema, and no annotations place a substantial documentation burden on the description. It covers only two of the five parameters and never explains what a journal record contains or how the collection is ordered, so an agent must fall back on the schema and on inference from sibling tools.

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 80%, so the baseline is 3. The description's remarks on per_page and entry_filter restate what the schema already says in more detail, adding no new semantics; campaignId, page, and entries are untouched in prose but well documented in the schema.

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?

The opening sentence names a specific verb and resource ("List journals"), so the agent knows exactly what operation this performs. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the many sibling list_* tools or from get_journal, so the reader must infer scope from the name alone.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The guidance given ("use per_page to keep responses small", "use entry_filter...") is about parameter tuning, not about when to choose this tool over alternatives such as get_journal or search. There is no statement of when NOT to use it, no prerequisite call ordering (e.g., needing a campaignId from list_campaigns), and no exclusions.

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