Skip to main content
Glama

checkpoint_list

Lists all saved checkpoints for the current virtual filesystem workspace to track changes and restore previous states.

Instructions

List all checkpoints for the current workspace.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function implementing the checkpoint_list tool logic. It fetches the list of checkpoints from the CheckpointManager and wraps it in a CheckpointListResponse.
    async def checkpoint_list(self) -> CheckpointListResponse:
        """
        List all checkpoints for the current workspace.
    
        Returns:
            CheckpointListResponse with list of checkpoints
        """
        checkpoints = await self.checkpoint_manager.list_checkpoints()
    
        return CheckpointListResponse(checkpoints=checkpoints)
  • The registration of the 'checkpoint_list' tool using the @server.tool decorator in the MCP server setup. It delegates execution to the CheckpointTools instance.
    @server.tool
    async def checkpoint_list():
        """List all checkpoints for the current workspace."""
        return await checkpoint_tools_instance.checkpoint_list()
  • The Pydantic schema defining the output structure of the checkpoint_list tool response, containing a list of CheckpointInfo objects.
    class CheckpointListResponse(BaseModel):
        """Response from checkpoint list"""
    
        checkpoints: list[CheckpointInfo]
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states it's a list operation, implying read-only behavior, but doesn't disclose any behavioral traits such as pagination, sorting, format of returned data, permissions required, or error conditions. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding how it behaves.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to understand quickly. Every part of the sentence earns its place by specifying scope.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. It states what the tool does but lacks details on behavior, output format, or usage context. For a list operation with no structured data on outputs, more information on what is returned would be helpful, but it meets basic requirements.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameters need documentation. The description doesn't add parameter details, but this is acceptable as there are no parameters to explain. Baseline is 4 for zero parameters, as the description doesn't need to compensate for any gaps.

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 description clearly states the action ('List') and resource ('checkpoints'), specifying scope ('for the current workspace'). It distinguishes from siblings like checkpoint_create/delete/restore by focusing on listing rather than modifying. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from workspace_list, which might also list workspace-related items.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the description implies it's for listing checkpoints in the current workspace, it doesn't mention when not to use it, prerequisites, or comparisons to sibling tools like workspace_list or ls that might list other resources.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/IBM/chuk-mcp-vfs'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server