Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
huly-mcp-selfhost

huly-mcp-selfhost

by JoKeks2023
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

list_notifications

Read-only

Retrieve your Huly inbox notifications grouped by issue, PR, or document. Filter unread items, set a limit, and optionally show notification IDs.

Instructions

Your inbox notifications, grouped by issue/PR/document

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_notifications"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idsNoShow notification ids
limitNo
workspaceNo
unreadOnlyNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv3.5.1

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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 bar is lower; the description adds genuinely new context by disclosing that results are grouped by issue/PR/document rather than returned as a flat list. It does not disclose the significant default that unreadOnly=true silently filters out read notifications, nor anything about ordering or volume.

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 tight phrase with zero filler, and the resource is stated before the grouping qualifier. It is a noun fragment rather than a sentence, which slightly weakens front-loading of the action.

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?

With four parameters, 25% schema coverage, no output schema, and only a readOnly hint, the description carries most of the burden and does not meet it. An agent cannot learn the default unread-only filtering, what `workspace` scopes, or the return structure beyond the grouping hint.

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 only 25% — just `ids` carries a description — while `limit`, `workspace`, and `unreadOnly` are undocumented in the schema. The description adds no parameter meaning whatsoever, so it fails to compensate for that gap.

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 names the resource ('Your inbox notifications') and the specific shaping behavior ('grouped by issue/PR/document'), so an agent knows exactly what comes back. It omits an explicit verb and does not distinguish itself from siblings like manage_notifications or mark_notifications_read, which is why 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 when-to-use guidance at all: no mention of when to prefer this over manage_notifications or mark_notifications_read, and no prerequisites stated. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name and the phrase 'Your inbox'.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools