SyncPen MCP Server

syncpen_list_documents

Retrieve a list of documents from your SyncPen account, optionally filtered by a specific folder.

Instructions

List documents in your SyncPen account, optionally filtered by folder.

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": "syncpen_list_documents"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No	Maximum number of documents to return (default 50, max 100)
`folderId`	No	Optional: Filter to documents in a specific folder

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.6.4Jul 10, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided. The description does not disclose any behavioral traits like pagination behavior, default limit, performance considerations, or authentication requirements beyond the implicit 'your account'.

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 description is a single concise sentence that front-loads the main purpose. It is efficient with no wasted words.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given that there is no output schema and the tool is a listing operation, the description lacks details about the return format, pagination, ordering, or what fields are included. This information is not provided by annotations or schema, so the description falls short.

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 the schema already documents both parameters adequately. The description adds minimal value by mentioning 'optionally filtered by folder', which maps to folderId, but does not provide additional semantics beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'documents', with the optional filter by folder. It distinguishes from sibling tools that list other resources like folders or comments.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as for searching or filtering by other criteria. There is no mention of when not to use it or context about prerequisites.

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