List endpoints from an OpenAPI JSON specification to identify available API operations and enforce contract compliance.
List endpoints from OpenAPI JSON.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| spec | Yes | OpenAPI JSON or path |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only listing operation but does not mention return format, error behavior, handling of paths, or any limitations.
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?
The description is a single, clean sentence with no filler. The verb and object are front-loaded, and every word contributes to the meaning.
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?
For a single-parameter list operation, the description plus schema cover the basic input and action. However, with no output schema and no annotations, the agent is left without details on the returned endpoint structure or when to choose this tool over its siblings.
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 input schema fully documents the single 'spec' parameter with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter detail beyond the schema and even uses the narrower phrase 'OpenAPI JSON' where the schema says 'OpenAPI JSON or path'.
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?
The description states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('endpoints') scoped to 'OpenAPI JSON', making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It is distinguishable from the sibling tools like apicontract_validate and apicontract_status by the listing action.
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 is given about when to use this tool versus apicontract_validate or apicontract_status. The description only says what it does, not when it should be preferred or excluded.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.