prodpad_list_roadmapsList all roadmaps in ProdPad, including names, IDs, and associated products. Use this to retrieve roadmap details for product planning and organization.
List all roadmaps in ProdPad. Returns roadmap names, IDs, and associated products.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds useful context about what is returned (names, IDs, associated products), but says nothing about pagination, result limits, or ordering, which matters for an unbounded 'list all' operation.
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?
Two short sentences, front-loaded with the operation and followed by the return payload. Zero filler and no repetition of the title.
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?
With annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description adequately says what comes back. The only gap is lack of detail on pagination/volume for an unfiltered list-all tool, which would matter at scale but is minor given the zero-parameter surface.
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?
The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; schema coverage is 100% by definition. Baseline 4 applies for a parameterless tool.
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 and resource ('List all roadmaps in ProdPad') and enumerates the returned fields, so the agent knows exactly what this tool retrieves. It does not, however, differentiate itself from sibling tools like prodpad_get_roadmap or prodpad_get_product_roadmaps, which is a missed opportunity in a dense roadmap-related sibling set.
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?
No guidance on when to use this versus prodpad_get_roadmap (single roadmap) or prodpad_get_product_roadmaps (roadmaps for one product). The agent must infer from the name alone that this is the unscoped, fetch-everything variant.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.