nrly

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

list_runs

Retrieve recent local run summaries to review and compare experiment results, giving agents quick visibility into prior runs before authoring or applying weight-space edits.

Instructions

List the latest local run summaries.

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_runs"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It hints that results are 'summaries' of 'latest' runs, but never states ordering, whether it is paginated, whether it is read-only (implied but unstated), or how 'local' differs from other run scopes. For a tool with zero annotation coverage this is a meaningful gap.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no redundant wording. It is efficient, though its brevity contributes to the specification gaps noted elsewhere.

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?

An output schema exists, so return structure need not be described. However, for a listing tool the description omits ordering, the meaning of 'local', and any mention of the limit parameter, leaving the agent with less than it needs to call it confidently.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0% and the sole parameter (limit, default 20) is never mentioned in the description. The description therefore fails to compensate for the undocumented parameter, leaving its meaning — a cap on returned entries — to be guessed from the name.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ("List ... run summaries") plus a scope qualifier ("latest local"), which distinguishes it implicitly from get_run (single run) and compare_runs. It does not explicitly name a sibling or state what makes a run 'local', so it falls 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 Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to call this instead of get_run, compare_runs, or list_studies, and no stated prerequisites. The agent must infer from the tool name alone that this is a discovery/enumeration call.

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