Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Daz3D-MCP

Daz3D-MCP

by MictlanLabs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

package_list

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists packages installed with package_install, helping you verify which Daz Studio assets are available before use.

Instructions

Lists the packages installed with package_install.

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": "package_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare this as read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a scoping hint that the list relates to packages installed via package_install, but it remains ambiguous whether that is an exclusive filter and it says nothing about return contents or pagination.

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 definition is a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted wording. Its brevity is appropriate, though the qualifier 'installed with package_install' is slightly ambiguous rather than fully precise.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple, zero-parameter, read-only listing tool whose annotations already cover safety, the description is minimally adequate. However, it leaves the scope of the listing ambiguous and does not describe what a package entry contains, which matters because there is no output schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. There are no parameter semantics for the description to supplement.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Lists the packages') and ties the tool to package_install, so an agent can identify the basic function. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from package_inspect or clarify whether the listing includes only packages installed via package_install or all installed packages.

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?

The phrase 'installed with package_install' implies a post-install listing context, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no when-not-to-use guidance, and no named alternative such as package_inspect for detailed information.

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