Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
SapperMCP

SapperMCP

by MasterX1582
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Gsettings List Keys

gsettings_list_keys

Lists keys in a specified GSettings schema so you can inspect available configuration options before changing desktop settings.

Instructions

List keys in a gsettings schema.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "schema": "<schema>"
    },
    "name": "gsettings_list_keys"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
schemaYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read-only enumeration, but never states that it has no side effects, whether it requires a running session bus, or what happens if the schema name is invalid. For an unannotated tool, that 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.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is one short, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. However, the brevity comes at the cost of under-specification rather than efficiency, so it earns only a middling score.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. That still leaves the input contract and the usage boundary unaddressed for a tool whose only parameter is undocumented everywhere. The definition is not complete enough for confident invocation.

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?

There is one required parameter, 'schema', and schema description coverage is 0%. The description does not say what format the schema takes (for example, a dotted identifier like org.gnome.desktop.interface) or whether a path form is accepted. The single piece of information an agent most needs before calling is missing.

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 states a specific verb and resource: list keys within a gsettings schema. That is unambiguous on its own. What it does not do is distinguish this from adjacent siblings such as gsettings_list_schemas or gsettings_describe, so an agent must infer the boundary from the names alone.

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, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives. Nothing tells an agent when to pick this over gsettings_list_schemas or gsettings_describe. The sentence only describes the operation, not the situation that calls for it.

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