Retrieves the repository paths configured in Shelly's Sidebar so you can identify which local repos are available for read-only terminal and git status queries.
Lists the repository paths configured in Shelly's Sidebar.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. Saying it 'lists' paths implies a read-only operation, and the 'configured in Shelly's Sidebar' source adds useful context, but it does not explicitly confirm safety, permissions, or return shape.
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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It immediately states the action and scope.
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 simple zero-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description is nearly complete: 'repository paths' conveys the return content. A minor gap is that it does not explicitly state the return type or behavior when no repositories are configured.
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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There are no parameter semantics to clarify, and the description does not need to compensate for any input schema gaps.
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 and resource: it lists repository paths, with the scope limited to those configured in Shelly's Sidebar. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like git_status or run_command, which operate on repositories rather than enumerating configured ones.
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?
Usage is implied by the scope 'configured in Shelly's Sidebar' — an agent can infer it should call this to discover configured repositories. However, the description gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives to related tools like git_status.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.