huly-mcp-selfhost

list_channels

Read-only

Retrieve all chat channels in a Huly workspace, optionally including archived ones, to review available conversations and choose where to post.

Instructions

List all channels in the workspace

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_channels"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`workspace`	No
`includeArchived`	No	Include archived channels

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv3.5.1Nov 12, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the description needs to add behavioral context and does not: nothing about ordering, pagination, result size, or whether archived channels appear by default. The only added detail is workspace scoping, which the schema already implies.

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?

A single short sentence with the resource and scope front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient but borders on under-specified rather than genuinely well-structured.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a two-parameter listing tool with no output schema, the description omits the meaning of `workspace`, whether archived channels are excluded by default, and whether results are paginated or complete. An agent could call it, but cannot predict what it will get back.

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?

At 50% schema coverage, the `workspace` parameter has no documented meaning in the schema, and the description does not explain it either (required? defaults to the token's workspace? ID or name?). `includeArchived` is the only documented parameter, and it is described solely in the schema, not the description.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("List all channels") plus the scope ("in the workspace"), which is enough to separate it from list_messages, list_comments, or list_thread. It stops short of naming an alternative or clarifying edge cases such as channels the caller is not a member of.

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 reach for this tool versus a sibling (e.g., listing members or messages), no prerequisites, and no scope exclusions. The agent must infer everything about applicability from the one-sentence purpose.

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

Deploy Server