Skip to main content
Glama
RMITBLOG

Parallels RAS MCP Server

by RMITBLOG

Publishing Folders

ras_pub_get_folders
Read-onlyIdempotent

List published resource folders to review application and desktop organization, check hierarchy, and verify folder-level access in Parallels RAS.

Instructions

List published resource folders that organise applications and desktops into logical groups for end users. Use this to review folder hierarchy, check resource organisation, or verify folder-level access.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax rows after filtering. Default 50, max 200. Prefer narrowing with `filter` over raising the limit.
fieldsNoTop-level keys to keep on each row. Unknown keys are dropped. Use this to shrink large responses to only the columns you need.
filterNoEquality filter on top-level fields (AND across keys). String values match case-insensitively.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv1.3.0
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • addedInput schema / properties / fields
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Top-level keys to keep on each row. Unknown keys are dropped. Use this to shrink large responses to only the columns you need.",
      +  "items": {
      +    "type": "string"
      +  },
      +  "type": "array"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / filter
      Added value: +{
      +  "additionalProperties": {
      +    "type": [
      +      "string",
      +      "number",
      +      "boolean"
      +    ]
      +  },
      +  "description": "Equality filter on top-level fields (AND across keys). String values match case-insensitively.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Max rows after filtering. Default 50, max 200. Prefer narrowing with `filter` over raising the limit.",
      +  "maximum": 200,
      +  "minimum": 1,
      +  "type": "integer"
      +}
  2. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, and openWorld semantics, so the safety profile is fully covered elsewhere. The description adds only domain context about what folders represent; it says nothing about pagination behavior, default result volume, or response shape.

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 resource definition front-loaded before the usage guidance. Every clause earns its place.

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 zero-required-parameter read tool with a fully documented schema, the description covers purpose and usage adequately. With no output schema, a brief note on what each folder row contains would have closed the remaining gap.

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 description coverage is 100%, so limit, filter, and fields are already documented thoroughly (including the advice to narrow with filter rather than raise limit). The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, which is the expected baseline.

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 (list) and a precise resource (published resource folders) and explains what those folders are for, which separates it from the app/desktop list siblings. It stops short of naming any sibling tool to contrast against.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives three concrete use cases (review hierarchy, check organisation, verify folder-level access), which tells an agent when this tool is appropriate. No when-not-to-use guidance or named alternatives are provided.

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