huly-mcp-selfhost

list_classes

Read-only

List Huly data classes for modules without dedicated tools, such as recruit, lead, hr, board, or drive. Filter by workspace and optionally count documents per class.

Instructions

Huly data classes (for modules without dedicated tools)

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_classes"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`module`	No	e.g. recruit, lead, hr, board, drive
`workspace`	No
`withCounts`	No	Count documents (slower)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv3.5.1Nov 12, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes that this is a safe read operation. The description adds the fallback scope, but it does not mention result shape, pagination, permissions, or workspace scoping, which are meaningful for a generic list tool.

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?

The description is a single short phrase with no wasted words and is front-loaded with the resource. However, it is terse to the point of under-specification for a tool with three parameters.

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?

Given a 3-parameter list tool with no output schema and only a readOnlyHint annotation, the definition is missing important context: default module behavior, workspace semantics, what classes are returned, and whether counts affect result size. It is not complete enough for confident invocation beyond the fallback condition.

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?

The schema documents module and withCounts, but workspace is undocumented. The description adds no field-level meaning to compensate, leaving the agent to infer workspace behavior and the relationship between module and workspace.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description identifies the resource as Huly data classes and frames it as a fallback for modules without dedicated tools. However, it does not explicitly state the operation (listing/returning classes); the verb is only inferable from the tool name.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The parenthetical 'for modules without dedicated tools' gives a clear condition for choosing this tool and implies dedicated tools exist for other cases. It does not name those alternatives or spell out exclusions, but the context is clear.

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

Deploy Server