Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@octri/mcp

@octri/mcp

by OctriDev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

list_endpoints

Read-onlyIdempotent

List API endpoints and guides grouped by section; for large APIs, list sections with endpoint counts or filter by section name.

Instructions

List the API's endpoints and guides, grouped by section. A large API lists its sections with endpoint counts instead: pass section to list one of them.

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_endpoints"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sectionNoOnly the sections whose name contains this text
projectIdNoProject to read. Optional: defaults to the project this server was started with. Only pass it to target a different project.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.4.2
    • changedInput schema / properties / projectId / description
      Previous value: -"Project to read. Optional — defaults to the project this server was started with. Only pass it to target a different project."New value: +"Project to read. Optional: defaults to the project this server was started with. Only pass it to target a different project."
    • changedInput schema / properties / section / description
      Previous value: -"Filter by section/tag name"New value: +"Only the sections whose name contains this text"
  2. First observedv1.1.1

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), so the bar is lower. The description still adds real value by disclosing that the response shape changes with API size — sections with endpoint counts instead of a flat endpoint listing — which an agent could not infer from annotations or schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

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

Two sentences, zero filler, with the primary listing behavior front-loaded and the size-dependent variant immediately after. Every clause carries information.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a two-optional-parameter read tool with no output schema, the key gap — that the response may be a section index rather than an endpoint list — is covered. Minor omissions remain: no mention of ordering, and projectId's default-project behavior is left entirely to the schema.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so both parameters are documented and the description need only supplement. It explains why `section` matters for large APIs, but its wording ('list one of them') sits slightly at odds with the schema's substring-filter phrasing ('sections whose name contains this text'), leaving the exact matching behavior fuzzy.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the API's endpoints and guides') plus the grouping behavior. It implicitly separates itself from the single-resource sibling get_endpoint, but never names an alternative such as search_docs for keyword lookup.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied: browse to discover endpoints, and pass `section` to drill into a section when the API is large. There is no explicit when-not guidance or routing to search_docs/get_endpoint, and the phrase 'pass section to list one of them' leaves the drill-down effect to inference.

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